NASHVILLE - In an era when city managers and city councils are taking a hyper-focused look at department budgets, is your department able to quantify the value of your organization, calculate the return on investment and justify your budget?
In his Wednesday morning Firehouse Expo session “Quantifying the Negative”—part of the Chief-to-Chief Program—Captain Eric Saylors with the Sacramento, CA, Fire Department, made the case that departments are focusing too heavily on collecting and reporting data related to fire loss as opposed to focusing on the right data—what was saved. He then presented a model that he said departments should be using to focus on a more accurate depiction of department effectiveness.
He explained that years ago, at his own department, he started digging into the data to see if they could translate budget cuts into property loss. “What I found was that we don’t collect the right data,” said Saylors, a third-generation firefighter and money manager at a private investment group. “We can tell you what we lose, all year, all day long, but what about the buildings next to it, the buildings that were saved?”
Saylors who said that he tends to “think in dollars and cents” explained that he set out to find a better way to report data that more accurately reflects the true value of a fire department. The key, he said, is to find measures that could be validated and reproducible. The end result was a simple formula: Total value (tangible value + intangible value) - (minus) loss = what is saved.
To break this down, the tangible value represents the value of the buildings that were saved by the fire department. The intangible value represents the economic value of the buildings saved and the businesses preserved. This value can be determined through economic impact modeling for which there are many resources available to fire departments. The loss is the number that is traditionally reported by the fire department, one that is simple to calculate but doesn’t show the full picture, he said. Adding the first two numbers and subtracting the loss will provide a number that represents what was saved. He reminded that this value doesn’t even include the value of life, which would obviously dramatically increase the end value.
Saylors then explained how to use Network Theory to articulate the spread of fire, and offered three case studies to walk attendees through the formula. The case studies resulted in numbers that show extraordinary department value and savings: “We’ve been doing this right for hundreds of years; I’m just helping you articulate it,” Saylors said.
So why does this matter? In short, fire departments are great at telling city councils that “you need us” by sharing individual stories of saving a life—but they want to see the dollars and cents. “Anecdotes aren’t data,” Saylors said. “They are powerful, but they aren’t data. You have to bring your own. We’ve been feeding the wrong data into the machine for years, and it’s starting to come back to bite us.”
Saylors also clarified the types of data that should be reported: “Call volume is NOT a measure of effectiveness; what is saved is a measure of effectiveness.” He added that because fire follows a “power law,” it should never be included on a graph with an EMS call—or special rescue or hazmat. “I don’t care how many EMS calls you have; it only takes one fire. They are different.”
Further, Saylors explained what dollars should be reported to whom. Specifically, report to the media the effectiveness of the department—the total dollar amount saved at an incident. Report to management the amount saved vs. your budget.
In the end, measuring losses alone demonstrates the magnitude of the event more than it illuminates the effectiveness of the fire department. The fire service must change the narrative by measuring, quantifying and reporting the value of saves, Saylors said.
Saylors encouraged any fire departments that are interested in learning more about how to capture this data to contact him at [email protected] or (916) 663-8420.
