The current EMS inter-local between the Travis County and the City
of Austin does not serve the Travis County taxpayer or most importantly the
patient.
The
average response time for a City of Austin ambulance IN
Travis County is over 16 minutes! In a life-threatening emergency,
brain cells begin to die after 4 minutes, and after
6 minutes, the potential for successful resuscitation falls to the
single
digits. Those County residents who do
get pulled back from the brink of death do so not because of the
ambulance but
because of the local fire department fire fighters who respond to these
calls
and the air rescue services provided by Travis County’s STARFlight
helicopters. For this extraordinarily bad performance Travis
County forks over an amazing amount of taxpayer money (over $12,500,000)
with
virtually no control over the services provided. Even worse, the
inter-local does not allow
Travis County to utilize existing qualified area fire department
resources to
mange cost of service and improves response time. The inter-local
offers only a City of Austin
solution at a whopping $1.5 million dollars per ambulance and for 2013,
the City
is proposing another hefty $4,500,000 increase in its cost for services
(33% increase)! To fully appreciate the problem, Travis
County could pay to put dual role fire-fighter paramedics on EVERY fire
truck in Travis County, maintain
higher training quality under a contract with Seton and the UT medical
school
than the City’s ambulance medics receive under their in-house program
and have
their own medical director with far more active and transparent
oversight of paramedic performance than the City ambulance medical
director provides to the County fire department EMT's now, for
$4,050,000
($450,000 less than what the City is proposing for just 4 ambulances and
it would reduce response
times from 16 minutes to under 8 for county suburban areas and under 12
minutes for rural areas. The three proposed City of Austin ambulances
would improve response times by only about 1-1.5 minutes. Of course,
Travis County doesn't need all its fire apparatus staffed
with a paramedic, my point is to simply illustrate how a more common
sense approach in delivering EMS can save lots of taxpayer dollars and
dramatically improve response time AND capacity. Travis County needs to
do what is right for the patient AND its taxpayers by fixing the
existing contract issues with the City of Austin.
Where’s the
Problem?
The City/County Inter-Local has no substantive performance
requirements for EMS services other than vague references, my favorite: “
provide emergency medical services in accordance with recognized standards to
access, triage, treat, evacuate and transport patients in the most timely
manner possible” (and which standards would those be?).
Additionally, it provides:
- no direct financial controls,
- no accounting of direct services costs by ambulance management,
- no managerial accountability of any type, and
- no transparency in any phase of the services provided
In fact, this inter-local essentially requires Travis County
to sign away its contractual "rights" for ambulance contract
oversight under the assumption an "EMS system" approach through a
inter-governmental partnership provides the county with maximum benefit.
Unfortunately, what may have provided maximum benefit 25 or
even 15 years ago is no longer the case given other cheaper, faster, higher
quality EMS delivery options. It essentially relegates Travis County to the
role of contractual hostage to a City of Austin managed ambulance service where
County needs are always second to those of the City.
What makes this even more
amazing is this particular inter-local agreement has been going on for 25
years, but it has:
·
Never been Independently
audited,
·
Never
competitively bid
·
Consistently
delivers mediocre to poor service for county residents (and I happen to be one
of those) at an extraordinarily high cost for those services
Violates Core Tenets of Responsible EMS Contracting
This City/County EMS inter-local agreement VIOLATES EVERY CORE TENET of responsible EMS contracting (Ref: The American
Ambulance Associations Guidebook- Best Practices in Designing, Managing and
Contracting for Emergency Ambulance Service).
What’s so revealing in this quoted reference is it
represents the gold standard for the private ambulance industry inter-governmental
contracting. Typically
governments have higher performance standards than private industry for matters
of public safety, but for the City/County EMS inter-local, there are no
standards of any consequence or value even close to private EMS industry
standards, which should be a BIG RED FLAG for Travis County leadership! . The irony is the privates have HIGHER
STANDARDS for public services than either Travis County or the City of Austin.
I am not promoting privatization as the solution, but its worth noting
not only for the above reason but because the City’s EMS Union has tried to
depict ambulance privatization as a step down when in terms of patient services
and cost to the taxpayer for Travis County it would be a step up!
To fully appreciate how bad the Travis County EMS
Inter-local really is, compare it to the following contracting essentials and
see for yourself how poorly written the EMS Inter-Local really is.
Best Practices in Contracting for Emergency Ambulance
Service
#1: Hold the EMS service accountable-TC’s EMS Inter-local does not.
Every ambulance
service should be evaluated on its ability to deliver results in the areas of
clinical excellence, response-time reliability, economic efficiency, bill
collection and customer satisfaction. This should be accomplished through
performance-based assessment. A
high-performance emergency ambulance service achieves clinical excellence,
response-time reliability, economic efficiency, and customer
satisfaction—simultaneously. The designated emergency ambulance provider should
be required to meet or exceed specified levels of performance in each of these
four operational areas. Without accountability, there are no assurances.
- Travis County Inter-local has no stipulations to hold the City of Austin Ambulance Department (EMS) accountable for its performance.
- There are no meaningful performance outcomes for ambulance response time
- There is no penalty for under performance or incentives for exceptional performance
- There are no monthly data reporting requirements
- There are no performance requirements for financial controls
- There are no economic efficiencies identified
- There are no clinical benchmarks (other than CPR save rate which represents less than 1% of the work load and is not an indicator of overall effectiveness or clinical competence)
- Bottom line: there are no contractual repercussions for the City of Austin's Ambulance Department for any of their activities, operational, clinical or financial
What are the consequences?
- At an average 16 minute response time the ability of the ambulance paramedics to make a difference in saving a life is clinically impossible.
-
The City ambulance
department consistently recommends annual increase in City & County
funded ambulances based on a computerized dispatching program that has
never been audited for accuracy.
In fact, the City ambulance departments own Medical Director
complains that the computer aided dispatching program the City uses to
prioritize 9-1-1 medical calls is inherently “flawed and should not be used or
relied on for determining future ambulance resource needs”.
- After the City ambulance department invested millions of dollars in a electronic patient record keeping system, which Travis County had to pay its 30% share, the billing process which was suppose to see huge dollar improvements in its efficiencies, requiring less billing staff remains terribly back logged (45 days) and for the fiscal year 2011 the City approved "adding" billing staff. So much for cost savings and improved services.
- Just for fiscal year 2010, STARFlight medical billings, which until recently have been managed under the inter-local by the City ambulance billing section, was discovered to be over $2,500,000 in arrears just for medicare bills! Any idea how many dollars they are behind in ground ambulance billing?!
- There is no independent customer satisfaction appraisal process to gauge user satisfaction other than a annual sampling the City does for its various departments, and a less than objective, outdated ambulance department customer service process
- The City ambulance management's only solution for their poor performance is recommendations that Travis County add more ambulance resources (at over $1,500,000 per unit). For fiscal year 2013, the ambulance director is pushing for Travis County to fund three more ambulances at a cost of almost $5,000,000 and will only improve services by "2%". An expensive solution given other cheaper and more effective management options including better utilization of existing ambulances using dynamic deployment and peak load staffing, and upgrading County ESD's (fire departments) to paramedic first response (at $150,000 per fire apparatus, considerably cheaper than adding ambulances).
#2:
Establish an independent oversight
entity- TC’s EMS Inter-local does not.
This is a body that
has an arm's-length relationship with a provider organization and
regularly monitors how it is performing. It periodically requires independent
outside audits. To be effective, the independent oversight entity should
consist of an unaffiliated and objective group of people selected for their
expertise in specific professional disciplines required in the development and
oversight of the emergency ambulance
service. Community representation on the independent oversight entity should include
leaders from areas such as the following:
• Legal
• Accounting
• Business
• Medicine
• Patient advocacy
• Hospital and/or
health care
• Local government
(elected official)
- Travis County has no "independent" oversight, only a toothless body called the EMS Advisory Panel which meets for one hour, every month. It was purposely made impotent by the City to minimize its oversight potential.
- To effectively manage a "vendor" for emergency ambulance service, be it another government or a private contractor, there MUST be effective oversight including monthly review of actual performance data and regular outside audits of the contract.
- As noted, this contract has never been independently audited or any consideration given to competitively bidding out service to qualified governmental agencies (example: county fire departments) or private ambulance contractors (example: AMR, Paramedics Plus) over its entire 25 year history. A fundamental violation in contract best practices.
- Additionally, the City ambulance management has told County administration their requests for ambulance performance data specific to ESD jurisdictions “yields no benefit” even though this was requested to aid the County and ESD’s in evaluating how to serve emergency patients more effectively. In fact the ambulance director stated to a Travis County executive sharing such information with the ESD’s would be “dangerous”.
- To date, both Travis County and the City Ambulance Departments own Medical Director, have been refused direct access to the agency's computer aided dispatch data on ambulance response and all patient related data from the agency's "paramedic run forms" for independent performance assessment and medical oversight.
#3:
Account for all service costs-
TC’s EMS Inter-local does not.
An effective emergency
ambulance service accounts for all its costs—direct, indirect, and shared. Cost calculations should include labor,
medical communications center, buildings, vehicles, equipment, supplies,
liability exposure, administrative overhead, and independent oversight costs.
- In spite of the language in the inter-local allowing only "at cost" expenses, the City of Austin regularly over prices its various direct and indirect services to Travis County.
- Example: billing for STARFlight: earlier in the year the cost for this service was $250,000 but the price "magically" shrunk to under $20,000 when the City became aware Travis County was seeking outside bill collecting services.
- None of the ambulance cost are itemized with specific correlation between cost for the item and benefit to Travis County residents for the services it receives.
- None of the new or supplemental costs are required to be OK'd by Travis County's auditor first.
- None of the ambulance service costs are regularly accounted for and certified accurate by an independent audit authority.
#4: Require system features that
ensure economic efficiency- TC’s EMS Inter-local does not.
The volume and
location of medical emergencies vary by hour of day and day of week. To reflect
this reality, ambulance deployment should be based on geographically deploying
the right number of ambulances according to historical call demand and
redeploying as events occur. In contrast, “fixed base” or “static” deployment
(which is the model the City uses for ambulance deployment), in which shift
schedules and unit locations are fixed, is generally discouraged and should not
occur other than in remote, low-volume locations.
- The City ambulance operation does not match staffing with demand, resulting in not enough resources during peak demand, and too many during low demand periods.
- Travis County could use more of its ambulance assets during peak periods and a smaller number for slow periods, supplementing the gaps in service with beefed up ESD first response paramedic engine companies at 1/10th the cost of an ambulance and 40% -60% faster.
- It could also hold on dispatching a county ambulance resource for the lower priority medical calls until first response confirms a need for patient transport. Rather than fixed deployments, Travis County ambulances should use a combo of fixed and dynamic deployment based on demand levels. Fixed for slow periods, dynamic for busy periods. Plus, the two paramedic supervisors (who drive fully equipped paramedic vehicles), and are paid by Travis County, per the inter-local to oversee county ambulance staff and operations, should be routinely required to stay in the county and actively integrate into ambulance gap coverage when a county ambulance is on a call.
#5: Ensure long-term
high-performance service- TC’s EMS Inter-local does not.
This includes
requiring results-oriented performance standards to be met, and then either
benchmarking the clinical and financial performance against other recognized
high-performance services or engaging in competitive procurement
- Travis County has no such
standards. At the very least the County should bring in a
professional EMS contract consultant to establish requirements for
ambulance service with clear, concise, measurable performance requirements
centered on patient services and cost controls, and cross reference
performance between cost of service, quality of care and customer
satisfaction (none of which is achieved under the present inter-local
agreement).
Why does Travis County continue
to renew a service agreement that cost more than what other communities pay for
comparable EMS service and delivers far less?
The answer:
Travis County, like most municipal and county governments, lacks in-house executive administrative
expertise with professional experience and knowledge of EMS best practices, performance contracting and
the EMS industry in general.
What to do?
Solve the one-sided contracting problems and the County
regains the critical foot hold needed to responsibly address the future
direction of ambulance services and EMS for Travis County. It does not
mean the County has to pull out of a "the present EMS system", it can
still be an active participant but under it own terms including how ambulance
and first response is delivered in its area of "the system". But, the County can no longer ignore these
contract problems and if it does, only guarantee more of the same: poor service, high operational cost, no
say, no control, no standards.
To
Travis County's credit they have taken the first big step and hired an
experienced consultant team to evaluate the current EMS level of
services. The results of the consultants report was no surprise,
ambulance service is not good in Travis County (that is in terms of
operational management, deployment and response, not the quality of the
paramedic services once it gets on scene). Now Travis County must take
the next step and hire another professional EMS consultant group with
proven EMS
contract experience, including writing a
real EMS performance contract, developing a master plan for integrating
County
Fire Department paramedic first response and ambulance operations, and
developing a competitive procurement process for county-wide EMS
services or
more dramatic, a process to cede direct responsibilities for EMS to
qualified County ESD
fire departments (of the current 13 ESD's, only 6 would fall into this
category but they cover the majority of County population). In the
interim, at the very least, the next pending EMS inter-local agreement
should be modified as
follows:
.
1) The County’s Purchasing and Audit Departments should
manage the EMS inter-local with support from the County Emergency Services
Executive and the County’s EMS Officer (STARFlight Program Manager). This joint sharing of oversight provides the
critical financial depth and experience
in contract oversight that does not exist in the County’s emergency services
section. This group should also be
authorized to use outside legal counsel familiar with performance specific EMS
contracting as its counsel and guide for managing the contract and developing
new service contracts to be competitively bid for all future service contracts.
2) Either the Auditors Office or preferably an
independent accounting firm familiar with this type of service contract should
audit the inter-local annually. Poor
performance should be financially penalized as they are in other communities
and in turn exceptional performance should be rewarded financially also.
3) All inter-local contract cost should be itemized by function (example: PIO services, Special Operations, Tactical Medics, HazMedics, Motorcycle Medics, Communications, Field Supervision, Community Services, Stand-By Services, Training, Office of the Medical Director (by sub-function), Travel, Vehicle Maintenance ) and correlated to the direct services the County receives for these expenses. An opt out clause should be included for each function to allow the County to select the services it wants for this agreement. Travis County should no longer be a “minority partner” with a “best effort” agreement with the City of Austin. Instead, Travis County should pay a single fee for ambulance transport services annually, offset by transport fees.
3) All inter-local contract cost should be itemized by function (example: PIO services, Special Operations, Tactical Medics, HazMedics, Motorcycle Medics, Communications, Field Supervision, Community Services, Stand-By Services, Training, Office of the Medical Director (by sub-function), Travel, Vehicle Maintenance ) and correlated to the direct services the County receives for these expenses. An opt out clause should be included for each function to allow the County to select the services it wants for this agreement. Travis County should no longer be a “minority partner” with a “best effort” agreement with the City of Austin. Instead, Travis County should pay a single fee for ambulance transport services annually, offset by transport fees.
4) Operational performance measures should reflect
a specific national standard for services, NFPA 1710 is probably the best
standard since it includes both ambulance and first response.
5) Performance reporting, the actual data on EMS response, should be formatted according to the planning and analysis needs of Travis County and its first response agencies and provided on a frequency (example: monthly) beneficial to the County (example: monthly). Additionally, all Travis County EMS related data (ALL CAD Info) should be automatically dumped into a commercial data warehouse with NO CITY CONTROL or OVERSIGHT. The data would be managed entirely by Travis County and its contractual Medical Director, and Performance Compliance Administrator.
6) Formally recognizing the jurisdictional and lead
responsibility of County Fire Departments (ESD’s) for incident command and
rescue operations.
7) Requiring a City ambulance to be moved into the County to cover for a County ambulance that is sent on City call (a frequent issue and compounded when the county ambulances are prevented from returning to their area of operation after transporting a patient to a local hospital because they keep getting sent on city calls).
8) Requiring the County funded ambulance supervisor units to be used to fill coverage gaps when a County ambulance is on a call (this is not currently done).
9) Requiring County first response units to be dispatched simultaneously with the ambulance (there is currently a 2 minute minimum delay)
1 10) Mandating
that
the City’s Office of the Medical Director fast track the credentialing
program for upgrading County Fire Department units to paramedic/ALS as
required
by the County (which he has refused to do because of his claim there
are too many paramedics, apparently the only place in the United States
with this problem). Better yet, the County would be ahead of the game
both financially and in level of oversight quality if it put out an RFP
for County medical direction
with detailed expectations, performance requirements, transparency and
accountability and selecting the best services from those who submit
proposals.
11) Create an independent oversight board with authority (teeth) to actively monitor and manage the inter-local. Include on the board: the auditor, PBO, Emergency Services, ESD Commissioner Representatives, ESD Fire Chief Representatives (I’d recommend ESD 2 and ESD 6), a EMS Contract Administrator (experienced in ambulance contract oversight and statistical analysis), consumers (neighborhood association participation)
11) Create an independent oversight board with authority (teeth) to actively monitor and manage the inter-local. Include on the board: the auditor, PBO, Emergency Services, ESD Commissioner Representatives, ESD Fire Chief Representatives (I’d recommend ESD 2 and ESD 6), a EMS Contract Administrator (experienced in ambulance contract oversight and statistical analysis), consumers (neighborhood association participation)
What Can County Taxpayers and Professional Fire-Fighters Do Now?
County
taxpayers and professional fire-fighters can tell the Travis County
Commissioners what they think by phoning their respective Commissioners,
or emailing them or signing a local petition supporting meaningful
change in the current City/County EMS inter-local (go to Change.org to
set up such a petition). Contact information for Travis County can be
found by googling "Travis County Commissioners".
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.