COMPUTERS ARE AN EVER-PRESENT PART OF THE modern fire service. As the current technology improves, more functionality is added to applications for dispatchers, personnel out in the field, and administrators and staff as agencies turn to computer-aided-dispatch (CAD) systems. The complexity of the applications that accompany this technology sometimes can create headaches for those agencies. Agencies can avoid many of these problems by rethinking the way they do business.
As an example, taking classes will shorten the learning curve for new software for upper management-level applications. Also, help is available on the Internet in the forms of documentation, user groups, and tutorials.
In my experience as a CAD vendor, an end user, and an administrator, I have seen many departments have difficulties when it came to writing specifications for a new CAD system or problems implementing a new one they had just installed.
“CAD OFF THE SHELF”
Most CAD vendors are now taking the “CAD off the shelf” (COTS) approach, also referred to as “shrink-wrapped” software. It is not in a box covered with plastic; it is designed and distributed as mass-produced commercially available programs. The software is sold “as is”; the vendor updates the software once or twice a year. If an agency wants something modified, it sends a request to the vendor. If the vendor feels the change would benefit the majority of the users, the change is implemented in the next software upgrade provided for its customers. Otherwise, the only thing the vendor may do for the agency is to design interfaces to any peripheral equipment controlled by the CAD system-external paging, tone alerting, and radio control, for example. The end results of the “COTS” approach are a lower end cost to the agency and a more stable product. The downside is a lack of customization of the system the agency purchases.
CUSTOMIZED CAD
An agency may contract with a software development company to design a fully customized CAD system specifically for that agency. The cost is usually much higher than that for a COTS program. Often, however, the program is designed by people who have had no experience in fire department operations.
Generally, a small representative community of the department (a committee) prepares the specifications for the department’s custom-made program. Even though these requirements are passed along to the software programmers, the end result of the program often is not exactly what the agency needs. The programmers have no idea of the needs specific to the fire service, and the programs often do not perform as expected or as specified.
 (1) Updated information, such as scene access details, should be passed along to units in an expedient manner. (Photos by author.) |
Sometimes, the committee members may overlook some issues that will involve additional costs to resolve. This problem is not limited to CAD systems; it applies to other software as well, including that used for payroll, records, staffing, and other functions. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to assemble a committee with enough people to make sure every aspect of the agency’s operation is covered.
“PREPLANNING” YOUR CAD PURCHASE
If your agency is considering replacing its CAD system, check to see what is available in the marketplace. There are many CAD vendors; most will come to your department and demonstrate their systems. Present to the vendor some specific scenarios so you can see how well the new system can be adapted to accomplish your goals. Some functions you might propose to the system demonstrator are entering calls, assigning and dispatching units, requesting additional resources, and handling additional alarm levels. When you are given the answer, “We’ll design something for that,” ask the vendor to demonstrate the process in detail. If the CAD system is going to be used by multiple departments in a regional dispatch office, all departments should be involved in the decision process or, at the very least, should understand that things may change when a new system is implemented. Things usually go more smoothly when everyone buys in before the system is implemented, because there usually are no surprises.
 (2) Well-planned dispatch and communication systems used in conjunction with trained personnel are key elements in keeping operations on-scene orderly and keeping chaos to a minimum. |
Also, check to see what systems other agencies are using and how they are being used. Much can be learned from talking with other agencies to see what issues and problems they had and, more importantly, what they did to resolve them. Avoid problems and mistakes that lead to delays by being prepared and informed. If an agency has a policy or procedure regarding the use of the system that would be well suited for use in your agency, it may be in the best interest of your agency to consider implementing it.
EVALUATE YOUR BUSINESS METHODS
The time you implement a new CAD system is a good time to reevaluate how your agency does business. Is it handling emergency responses as efficiently as possible? Efficiency includes cost, crew, dispatcher workload, and response time. A CAD system should decrease response time by automating functions such as recommending the correct units for a particular incident to the dispatcher and automatically notifying those units of the waiting call. There will be a learning curve with any new system, but you can decrease the time needed to learn the new system. Following are some steps you can take to make operations more effective.
- Are department communications being handled efficiently? If a lot of radio traffic is being generated, laptops (mobile data terminals (MDTs) or remote data terminals (RDTs) can be set up to work with the system. They allow the units to receive additional information about the call without that information’s being broadcast across the radio. They also allow the unit to change status (responding, on scene, for example) with the push of a button. Calls on the radio would be limited to requesting additional resources and updating reports on the situation.
If laptops are out of the question, reevaluate the channel assignments. A small agency may not have any traffic issues, but things can get very busy for a larger department. Some agencies use a “common” channel to keep track of all units and then assign the units to their respective channels based on geographic assignment.1 Other agencies divide their channels into geographical regions (North Channel, South Channel, for example). Those dispatchers track all units in their area to determine if they are assigned or available.2 Others divide their channels according to the type of call. They have several medical channels, fire channels, and mutual-aid channels.3 An agency should look at these and other ways of dispatching and should not be afraid to modify their handling of communications to fit the CAD system if the system is not working with the way they dispatch.
- Are units being assigned and dispatched efficiently? System Status Management was very popular with ambulance services in the 1990s. Many still use this method of positioning emergency units.4 It has been shown that placing a unit in an area where calls are statistically bound to occur decreases response time. But, many other factors must be considered in addition to response time.
Career fire departments usually report entry, training, and physical fitness when they are not on calls. Training and fitness are vital to ensure firefighters are fit and ready to respond to emergencies. These activities cannot be done if the unit is sitting on a street corner or in a parking lot, locations where units in a System Status Management agency would wait for their calls. Additionally, a fire engine usually burns quite a bit of fuel when idling, which the unit would be doing in this scenario. Studies also have shown that when crews sit in their units for an extended time, an increased number of back injuries can result.5 Finally, it is unfeasible to have a volunteer fire department require that its members sit in an emergency vehicle in a parking lot or on a street corner.
Since the System Status Management method of dispatching and tracking units is not the most practical for fire departments, other options need to be available to make sure that the closest appropriate unit is sent to an emergency call. There are two common ways of accomplishing this.
1 Dispatch the unit based on a predetermined response for the zone in which it is located (also called “zone order,” “station order,” or “run card”). Using the predetermined response method, each location (usually broken down by zone, grid, or address range) is given a predetermined list of stations that will respond to an incident in its area. The stations are listed in order-the closest, the next closest, and so on. The agency and the CAD system determine the depth of the list. In the old “run card” system, this information was printed on a card that corresponded to an address. Other information would also include how many and which types of apparatus to send and anything else that could help the dispatcher or responding crews. The earlier CAD systems basically automated this “run card.” Many departments still use this system, because it is a proven system and is not prone to as many errors as a newly implemented “closest unit” system.
2 Compare the unit’s location with the location of the call [also called “automatic vehicle location (AVL) recommendation” or “closest unit recommendation”]. In this method, a global positioning satellite receiver (GPS) transmits the location of the unit to the dispatch computer. The location of the incident is matched to a preexisting listing of locations and coordinates. The computer then calculates the distance between the appropriate units and the location. The calculations are done by line-of-sight in older systems or by road routing in the newer ones. The unit selected as the closest unit is recommended to respond to the call. The dispatcher still has the final say, but the computer is usually correct.
The more expensive CAD systems also take into account road construction, speed limits, traffic lights, and stop signs when making a recommendation. Palm Beach County (FL) Fire-Rescue is taking it one step further by integrating the CAD system with the traffic light-control system to control the traffic lights on the way to an incident.
What should you do if your agency has been working off run cards for years and you want to switch to an AVL type of response? What is the cost-vs.-benefit ratio of using a routed system that has a road network to determine the closest unit instead of a line-of-sight system? Are there canals, railroad tracks, or other features that may render a line-of-sight system ineffective? How much of an improvement in response time will be gained from the switch? Would it be worth it? You need to ask all these questions. The answers will differ according to the agency’s needs and profile.
If the new CAD system is for a regional center that dispatches for multiple agencies, would it be able to function if some units are dispatched using the run card concept and others the closest unit response? If not, there must be a plan to address this issue. Such a situation could occur if one of the agencies is adamant about not sending its units to calls outside of its jurisdiction or if some of the units are not AVL/GPS equipped. Some contingencies for this situation should be in place at the administrative level as well.
3 Are the units responding to calls appropriately? Many agencies are adding commercial call-prioritizing systems to their dispatch protocols. One benefit of these systems is that the liability for recommending which units to send is reduced because industry standard protocols are used instead of having to develop agency-specific protocols. Another benefit is that the agency’s liability is somewhat reduced by determining which units respond to calls in “emergency mode” (“Hot” Response, Code 3, and Lights and Siren, for example) and which do not.
A few of these systems are on the market. Most require that dispatchers undergo a certification process to ensure that they are familiar with the system’s protocols and algorithms. Most of the systems also include dispatcher prearrival instructions for the caller as well as response determinants (predetermined protocols relative to what types of units respond and in what manner). As an example, a cardiac arrest would be the closest basic life support (BLS) “hot,” closest advanced life support (ALS) “hot,” and closest supervisor “hot”; a person experiencing a general weakness would be the closest BLS “hot”, closest ALS “cold,” with no supervisor; and a stubbed toe would be the closest BLS “cold” with no ALS or supervisor. It would not make much sense to have an ALS unit respond with lights and siren across town for a response for a stubbed toe, although some agencies still respond in this manner.
- Is the system thoroughly tested, and are the personnel (field personnel and dispatchers) thoroughly trained to deal with problems that may arise out of the new CAD system? I have seen agencies implement computer software (not just CAD systems) with a minimum of training, with the attitude, “We’ll get the hang of it eventually.” If your agency wants to implement software, especially a CAD system, with the least number of problems, you need to train all of your personnel in how to operate the software before you implement it.
This may sound obvious or trivial, but it is not. It amazes me that some agencies provide only a minimum of training above on-the-job training. This policy results in inconsistency of use and chronic errors: The persons training them may not know the correct way because they were taught by people who were improperly trained by other people who were insufficiently trained, and so on.
Properly training in the software before going “live” with it also decreases the stress involved, because the workers know what to expect from the software and how to use it in a stressful situation. It also allows the software to be tested and issues to be found before it is used in the real world.
Even with proper planning and training, issues will still arise when the new system is up and running. Before going back to the vendor to see if the system can be changed, determine if something in your agency’s operations should be changed to make it more efficient and compatible with the software’s functions. If the change will result in decreased efficiency or have a severely negative impact on the delivery of services, there may be no choice but to have the vendor change the system. If the change is a simple one or can be attributed to the system, contact the vendor for assistance in resolving the difficulties.
To effectively implement new software, administrators need to reevaluate the way their agency conducts business. This may cause some growing pains in the short term; but, in the long term, the transition will go more smoothly, and the agency will run more efficiently.
Author’s note: Since this technology is ever-changing, there may have been revisions in the systems since this article was written.
EndNotes
1. Palm Beach County (FL) Fire-Rescue has a “Fire Main” channel, which tracks the available units and assigns them to incidents. Units assigned to an incident communicate on the North/West, Central, South, and City channels (Tac 2, Tac 3, Tac 4, and Tac 5, respectively). If the incident requires the use of a separate fireground channel, Tac 6 through Tac 11 are available and are monitored by a dispatcher until the incident is under control.
2. Miami-Dade (FL) Fire-Rescue has a North and a South dispatch channel as well as a tactical channel. All communications for all units are done on their respective channel, based on the geographic location of the incident or the unit’s quarters. If an incident requires the use of a separate fireground channel, the tactical channel is used.
3. The Chicago (IL) Fire Department uses North and South Fire and EMS channels dispatched out of the Main Fire Alarm Office and the Englewood Fire Alarm Office, respectively.
FDNY dispatches in this manner. In New York City, each borough has its own communications office with its own channel; the fireground is covered with a nonrepeated channel. Communications from the fire scene to the dispatch office are conducted over the borough channel. EMS is handled on multiple channels for each borough, out of the communications office as well. In both cases, mutual aid is done over several frequencies.
4. American Medical Response is one of several EMS providers that still uses the System Status Management concept of resource allocation and positioning.
5. Morneau, Paul M. and J. Peter Stothart, “My aching back,” Journal of Emergency Medical Services; 1999, 24(8): 36-50, 78-81.
CRAIG PRUSANSKY, EMT-P, is a lieutenant and 16-year veteran of Palm Beach County (FL) Fire-Rescue. He served as the department’s systems analyst from 1998 to 2001. He is also the CERT Team liaison and planning officer for Palm Beach County Battalion 4 in the Delray Beach/Boynton Beach (FL) area.
