CAD says.....

[Future Fireman 4]

Fire Dispatching: "CAD Says..."

BILLY GOLDFEDER

Firehouse.Com Contributor

Officials admit it took five minutes just to get the city's new automated 9-1-1 system to dispatch an ambulance. The system failed to recognize a street viaduct as an acceptable address in its database. The automated system then sent an ambulance to the closest address in the database, which was several blocks away on North Houston Street. Officers had to eventually flag down another ambulance near by.

While not referring to that case specifically, here is another example where CAD says to do this or CAD says to do that. And while CAD may only be as good as the software, the hardware and the data placed in the system, a most critical factor in any CAD system must be the fire dispatchers.

CAD is a great tool but so many systems are developed by folks who do not do the dispatching. And while no one group should be the solution to any one problem like that, so many CAD systems are designed, developed and installed without asking some of the folks who will use it...or depend on it. Then it is in, up, running and problems come up. Sometimes the problems are really bad. Headline making problems. Lawyer hiring problems. Funeral going problems.

Years ago, we had some dispatchers who I felt were the absolute best in the business. They averaged "call handling time" (from the time the phone rang until the time the tones went off) of 30 seconds.

CAD Says.... A Firehouse.com Article

Found this really interesting. What do you dispatchers think of it?

Mike

[x242Steve 1]

What do you dispatchers think of it?

I think that anyone who is going to be dispatching Fire Department units needs to understand what each unit does (Engine vs. Truck vs. Rescue, etc.) and how many of each type are needed for certain calls and alarm levels. Also, you should be familiar with the available resources of the Departments you are dispatching. Not to mention a basic knowledge of neighborhoods, major roads, landmarks, etc.

Using the suggested CAD assignment is great 99 times out of 100, but that 1% of the time that you don't have the computer telling you what to do, you should be able to shoot from the hip. After all, are we Dispatchers or Computer Terminal Operators?

Of course, I am biased since I was a Volunteer FF for a couple of years before getting hired as a Dispatcher, and continue to serve in both capacities today. I am not saying you need to be a Firefighter to be a Fire Dispatcher, however I see no reason why Fire Dispatchers' training programs can't include basic Firematic education. (The localized Fire Dispatch Training Program that I went through DOES include this information.)

Edited March 2, 2008 by 242steve

[JBE 328]

CAD is only as good as the people who programmed it, or the people who use it. Processing time are a big issue. I think if something spikes up in processing time, it has to be looked at on a case by case basis. It's also very refreshing to see someone on the other side of the radio saying what I've been advocating for years, GET INTO THAT OFFICE AND SEE WHAT WE DO AND WHY WE DO IT!!!!!!

Read my making life easier threads to get into this further. Nothing bothers me more than people who rely strictly on CAD.

[RescueKujo 130]

I have coworkers that use that quote WAAYY too often ("but that's what the CAD picked"). They will not go out and learn our districts. When they do their mandatory quarterly ride-a-longs (if they do them at all) they ride with people they believe to be friends or units that do not do move ups or run many calls. Can't tell you the joy some of us got when a fellow dispatcher rode with a notoriously slow unit and ran his butt off and had a patient vomit in the back while he was there

We as dispatchers need to know what are crews have to do when doing their job. Get out of your office and go see where your crews are and what the district is...

It's part of the professionalism of your career.

[Guest ff164]

It seems that the some calltakers/dispatchers rely on the CAD system info rather than the caller's information. As

calltakers/dispatchers you must INTERVIEW the caller.

If the caller states they live at 123 Main St , Anytown NY but the CAD shows MAIN ST in SOMETOWN NY, I hope that the calltakers/dispatcher would send the ANYTOWN PD/FD or EMS based upon the information gathered thrughout their phone interview or maybe send both to check their own jurisdictions.

Most cities/towns/villages have duplicate address or similar street names (St,Ave,La,Pl, Way). Then they are used by a computer programer from a desk, probably from the other side of the country using, a computer program done by someone else from the other side of the country, to program the CAD program you are using.

This is especially true if a local calltaker/dispatcher calls a another dispatch center with a specific request for specific agency for a specific address to be dispatch.

CAD = Computer AIDED Dispatch

What did we do before CAD ??????????

[Bnechis 3,961]

What did we do before CAD ??????????

Run cards worked fine for over 100 years

[Bnechis 3,961]

Our bigger problem with CAD is when its not followed:

i.e. CAD says E2, E4, E1 and the dispatcher says E1, E2, E4

When responding from multiple stations the order tells us who is responsible for what fuction (1st due, 2nd due, etc.). A few dispatchers put it in numeric order even when the CAD has it correct.

[Guest ff164]

Run cards worked fine for over 100 years

But, to get to the run card you need to do a proper interview of your caller

[Bnechis 3,961]

Run cards worked fine for over 100 years

But, to get to the run card you need to do a proper interview of your caller

Run cards were used in the 1870's...no caller, just pull a lever and the alarm office or the house watchman did the rest.

[Oswegowind 17]

Run cards worked fine for over 100 years

But, to get to the run card you need to do a proper interview of your caller

Run cards were used in the 1870's...no caller, just pull a lever and the alarm office or the house watchman did the rest.

And this matters why? It is 2008, we have computers now, and other technologies. The point of this thread is that there seems to be a decline in overall society as to the "Who Cares" mentality. This is just another one of those examples that everywhere people are doing less and getting away with it, and in some cases how civil service is failing the people. There once was a time when everyone got into the Emergency services because they actually wanted too, now there is a group that are just in it for the paycheck, and it damn shows! I firmly believe that each individual is responsible for being the best at his or her job, but I do have a work ethic while others don't. End Rant!

[JBE 328]

This is where you get people who know the units, and area, to help program the CAD to give the proper alarm assignments. This knowledge should also be taken into account when dealing with automaitc aid, or responses involving limited access highways. Take those old run cards and integrate them into the CAD.

Our bigger problem with CAD is when its not followed:

i.e. CAD says E2, E4, E1 and the dispatcher says E1, E2, E4

When responding from multiple stations the order tells us who is responsible for what fuction (1st due, 2nd due, etc.). A few dispatchers put it in numeric order even when the CAD has it correct.

I really need to get some sleep. I looked at this and it took me a few minutes to figure this one out.

[res6cue 67]

Simply put, there is way too much reliance on technology these days, and it has "dumbed people down" (for lack of a better term) in many respects.

Technology is wonderful, and it indisputably has its place in our world, but at what cost? During the Blackout of 2003, many people were absolutely and completely dumbfounded and lost without electricity. Panicked because the landline and cell phone circuits were overloaded. Freaked out that the Internet was down.

Speaking specifically on the topic of dispatchers becoming overly dependent on CAD, it worries me. It used to be the guy or gal manning the radios had a good enough sense of what was going on in the field to understand their job. More importantly, they knew the area they were serving, if not from growing up there then from learning it. These people would know when something didn't look or sound right, whether it was from a CAD screen or a physical runs card. This is fast becoming not the case. "If it's on the computer screen, it must be right!" seems to be the new mantra.

The same can absolutely be said for emergency responders. There was a time not so long ago, a decade at most, where you couldn't become a driver in most fire companies until you could show you knew your area well enough that you could get the rig to a fire without having to spend time looking in a street directory. Nowadays that seems to not be the case. As long as you can grab a runs sheet or ask dispatch for directions, it's all good. It's kind of sad, actually, how much I've personally heard a drastic increase in the requests for directions over the air. Back when I became a driver, if I ever pulled that, my Chief would've rightly smacked me upside my head!

Advances gained by technology, at the expense of making people dumber or lazier, is NOT a good trade off.

[IzzyEng4 427]

As a dispatcher for several years handling calls over a large area, I know the good and bad points about a CAD. The biggest problem is like everyone said, the programmers and the center director who haven't be on the desk for quite some time just don't know or have forgot. This article the Chief Goldfeder wrote brings to light one thing, the CAD still needs a human element and backup.

When you are entering in data for a large area, the programmers a bound to forget something. That is what was done here, a viaduct that always had a listing in the old computer system and also the old card system was not entered into the new CAD. Since there was no data in the computer, a good dispatcher / decision dispatcher who knows his / her job and area should look up the closet intersection to the one that is not in the CAD or look it up through a backup system. I still believe though you have a CAD, there should also be a printed version of the run cards. ALSO, you should be able to "force" the entry in and also after the incident the correct information must entered into the computer by the CAD manager so that this will not happen again.

Knowing your area also is a major help of a dispatcher and also for a responding unit.

[Guest WCDES636]

Our bigger problem with CAD is when its not followed:

i.e. CAD says E2, E4, E1 and the dispatcher says E1, E2, E4

When responding from multiple stations the order tells us who is responsible for what fuction (1st due, 2nd due, etc.). A few dispatchers put it in numeric order even when the CAD has it correct.

The original dispatch is in the proper order. The rattle off, some people use the event order, witch will not give you the correct order.

[Oswegowind 17]

636 on the recall, the line changes the order of response?

[JBE 328]

We have run cards that are maybe 25 yrs old, but I'm not sure if they were thrown out in the renovations. I'm hoping we still have them in the event CAD and the back up crash on us.

[Oswegowind 17]

It seems like you wouldn't need em...J/K...JBE the human run card...

[Guest WCDES636]

636 on the recall, the line changes the order of response?

On the original dispatch screen, the order is correct. Once it is dispatched and added to current calls. the order changes. after 2 minutes we do a rattle off on units and address to remind the units where they are going. Some people use the events screen to do the rattle off. This would give the units out of order.

[Oswegowind 17]

That is different, our screen is the job and it always stays the same way unless closer units respond, they are added on to the end, but they aren't included in the "rattle off"...they already called responding.

[Bnechis 3,961]

The original dispatch is in the proper order. The rattle off, some people use the event order, witch will not give you the correct order.

Thanks. Thats the 1st explination I've ever heard. It would have been nice if the powers that be acknowledged our issue and tried to get it reprogrammed.

[Guest WCDES636]

Thanks. Thats the 1st explination I've ever heard. It would have been nice if the powers that be acknowledged our issue and tried to get it reprogrammed.

It has been brought up with the CAD software provider many times.

[WAS967 97]

The CAD we have in Westchester now is certainly better than what we used to have (did the original one EVER work?). One little intricacy that drives me nuts about it is the apparent inability for the CAD to recognize system status management. We have several medicas that cover a large area and one going out changes the entire response layout, which we have been told the CAD cannot recognize. This often results in say Medic1 being out and Medic2 being dispatched to Town X where it's really Medic 3's response area at the time.

636: What CAD software does the county presently use?

Edited March 6, 2008 by WAS967

[Oswegowind 17]

WAS, sounds like you just have to add Posts...that act as Stations. When you move a unit from 1 station to the other, you technically put them in a bay (on the computer) and this adjusts the response areas...even if bays are normally empty. As an example if we have a working fire on the West side of Yonkers and move a unit from 1 station to the other, we literally move the units location on the computer screen, if they go from Station 13 to Station 1, they go from Engine Co. 13 to Engine Co. 1 however are still called Engine 313. This adjusts the response areas appropriately. Sounds like having a few phantom stations would solve your problem, only filling them when units are adjusted from the norm. I do not know what CAD system you have, but good luck...MFY

[Guest WCDES636]

Intergraph is the CAD Software. And the problem is the changes to you unit responses in the last year. Your original STATIC Posts are no longer in place, but yet the CAD still shows them. Westchester EMS has to get with the CAD division to sort it out.

[Guest]

Does any CAD interact with SST? In Rockland we don't use SST but I am aware of it. Almost all of us in Rockland use New World Systems CAD

[Oswegowind 17]

CAD's can work in SST, hopefully you are speaking about system status, as long as their are stations at each post that can be recognized and have an area assigned to each and every location. Hence, here in Yonkers we have a number of posts for EMS units, the CAD that Empress uses does not recognize the closest unit, however the dispatcher has to do so on their own. In order to cover that via CAD, they would have to add a number of response areas, such as Post 2, response area A, leading to 2A. This would encompass a number of streets in that area. So if their were no unit on Post 2, the next available unit may be that on Post 1 or at Post 7, using the response area programming. Every system is flawed, there will be no perfect, at least that I can see. When using CAD as the only basis there will be discrepancies and when using the dispatcher only there will be things missed at times. A combination of both is always important. Hope that helps a little...