Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Run Volume

  1. #1
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    47

    Default Run Volume

    I couldn't attend a seminar this year. I've heard that run volume will factor into scoring. How does this work? Does low volume departments get kicked out by computer scoring? Is a minimum call volume required?


  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    57

    Default Run Volume

    From my best understanding, this has everything to do with risk and cost benefit. Taking your figures to find a frequency of use and cost per person affected benifit has everything to do with run volume. For instance... you want a 200K pumper, of your call volume; 45 per year are actual fires, so over the life of the engine (25 yrs) you would respond to 1125 fires. Now divide that into the cost of the engine. or...a frequency of use value of $177.78 over the investment.
    Now figure for your population vs runs. The cost per use of 177.78 divided into a population of say 1500 gives you a cost per person affected value of $8.44.

    I would immagine that as small as those numbers look, they are not small enough to satisfy the federal investment over the life of the rig. Basically busier departments that will experience high use of the purchase at the best value should receive funding. Again, that is my understanding, but I am 0 for the last 2. JMHO

    Anyone care to jump on this grenade?

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,030

    Default

    How about population of first due area x service life ( 25years) divided into total cost of project = cost benefit per person

    1500 x 25 = 37,500


    37,500 divided into $200,000 = $5.33

    Only way to get a better cost benefit here is to smack the intitial cost of the project with some of your own money!
    Kurt Bradley
    Public Safety Grants Consultant

    "Never Trade Skill for Luck"

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    35

    Default

    So does $5.33 make the cut? What should I be targeting as a Cost Benefit amount?

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    35

    Default

    So does $5.33 make the cut? What should I be targeting as a Cost Benefit amount?

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,030

    Default

    I try to use $100 or less for frequency of use and $2.00 or lower for cost per person.
    Kurt Bradley
    Public Safety Grants Consultant

    "Never Trade Skill for Luck"

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    197

    Default

    kurt...are those calculations truly taken into consideration? if so, how would our department stack up?

    15,000 population
    apparatus cost - $550,000 (quint)
    asking for 400,000 (will recieve approx $150,000 for a pumper trade-in)
    no aerial apparatus in our inventory with 50+ buildings over 4 stories

    thanks

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by steelman View Post
    kurt...are those calculations truly taken into consideration? if so, how would our department stack up?

    15,000 population
    apparatus cost - $550,000 (quint)
    asking for 400,000 (will recieve approx $150,000 for a pumper trade-in)
    no aerial apparatus in our inventory with 50+ buildings over 4 stories

    thanks
    Are the 50+buildings occupied? If so, i think it looks pretty good. Especially if you are classed Suburban and have a reasonable call volume.

    Seems like a lot of 4+ story bldgs for 15,000 pop--are they office bldgs, storage, apartments??

    earl

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    197

    Default

    25 or so are heavy industry / factories......are they looking for height for a four story building or actual floors? like most communities we have a ton of new single family homes with roof ridges at 50 ft or higher and 12/12 pitches, no way we can reach them with ground ladders.........

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Alum Bank, PA
    Posts
    580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WFDFPBEMSL4 View Post
    For instance... you want a 200K pumper, of your call volume; 45 per year are actual fires, so over the life of the engine (25 yrs) you would respond to 1125 fires. Now divide that into the cost of the engine. or...a frequency of use value of $177.78 over the investment.
    Now figure for your population vs runs. The cost per use of 177.78 divided into a population of say 1500 gives you a cost per person affected value of $8.44.
    I thought for cost benefit you use 20 years instead of 25 years. Correct me please if I am wrong.

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Hoping this isn't hijacking, but it's still related. Would 20 years be acceptable as service life for a quick attack? With our department, it'd likely get 25-30, but I can see an evaluator looking at it thinking "WTF are they trying to pull?"

    Using 20 years I get a $1.79 using the population ratio and $35.71 per run.

    If I drop to 15 years, I get $2.38 pop and $47.61 per run.

    Based the numbers on a $125,000 quick attack/brush replacing a '79 model brush/skid. Of course, the 20 year service life looks better, but I hate to push my luck!

  12. #12
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    I think the estimated annnual increase in call volume and population are what is missing from those calculations, so your results are going to be off without taking that into consideration.

    Current calcs are all that really matter anyway since future call volume and population are big unknowns. So current cost/resident, square mile, etc, etc are all that the computer crunches. The lower the ratio, the better the chance. It's all about reasonability.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imafireman View Post
    I thought for cost benefit you use 20 years instead of 25 years. Correct me please if I am wrong.
    Well typically I use 20 years with the thought being that current PG puts emphasis around the 20+ years of age for replacement but, I see many departments trying to replace at 25+. I would say if your past history indicates that you are getting 25+ years of service form your fleet then it is "reasonable" ,as my esteemed colleague from Texas pointed out, to assume that you would have the truck in sevice for that length of time. I would clarify that in my narrative for the reviewer though.
    Kurt Bradley
    Public Safety Grants Consultant

    "Never Trade Skill for Luck"

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,727

    Default

    I used 20 years for our brush truck. We replaced a vehicle that was 16 years old.

    Sometimes a simple analogy doesn't hurt, to put the figures into perspective for the readers. For the brush narrative I made a comment about the vehicle lasting 20 years ($6750/yr) a small price to pay compared to the police department that is replacing cruiser(s) each year at a cost of about $25,000.
    Last edited by onebugle; 03-08-2007 at 08:27 AM.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber ktb9780's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Auburndale, FL
    Posts
    6,030

    Default

    Great point onebugle; the reviewer's peception of the reasonableness of your project is a key factor. If you don't plant those seeds, the reviewer is left to his/her own jdugement. Kind of like a defense attorney planting that "seed of doubt" in a jury's mind; all it takes is the seed being planted, to grow the reasonable doubt theory aka; The O.J Theory.
    Kurt Bradley
    Public Safety Grants Consultant

    "Never Trade Skill for Luck"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Minitor V volume problem
    By MichaelsDad in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-12-2006, 04:47 PM
  2. Have you ever been on a fire trucks last run?
    By Firefighter1219 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-29-2005, 11:30 PM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 12-02-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2003, 09:39 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 11-15-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-16-2003, 06:35 PM
  5. Pay Per Run
    By backdraft663 in forum Fire Explorer & Jr. Firefighting
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-28-2003, 03:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts