Dispatching Consistency

[x635 4,066]

How important is it to you that your dispatch agency maintain consistency when giving the intial dispatch?

Different dispatchers will phrase and format the same incidents several different ways. Is it important that every dispatcher in the same agency dispatch in the same format using the same concise terminology and format? Or should every dispatcher be able to dispatch in their own "style"?

[16fire5 693]

How about coming into the 21st century and getting rid of all the unnecessary things places have in their dispatch and keeping it short and sweet. That way when there's a storm or tons of alarms you can still manage dispatching like professionals.

"60 control to XXX" Why do we need to say "60 Control to"? All the other stuff "all home units/monitors"

How about

Tones then "XXX respond to 222 Main Street between Leaf and Tree Streets for a indoor odor of smoke apartment 2B on the second floor"

If your dispatchers can't do it don't worry they have a computer that can.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I personally think that dispatchers should be able to dispatch their own way, ONLY if the Fire/EMS/Police crew can comprehend what he/she is saying.

So your answer is No. Since they can not be comprehended 100% of the time.

[antiquefirelt 994]

This is a huge issue for our regional comm center. The final product gets very low scores from the users (FD/PD/EMS) and almost every complaint is tied to individuals not following one set of guidelines from what is sent to how it sent and the terminology used. In the end it shows as varying levels of quality day to day, shift to shift, dispatcher to dispatcher, indicative of failed leadership and/or organization.

[FireMedic049 597]

1) How important is it to you that your dispatch agency maintain consistency when giving the intial dispatch? Very.

2) Different dispatchers will phrase and format the same incidents several different ways. Is it important that every dispatcher in the same agency dispatch in the same format using the same concise terminology and format? Yes.

3) Or should every dispatcher be able to dispatch in their own "style"? No.

Now, I'll qualify those answers with the following:

1) Is it important that as a fire department, we are consistent with our response to a dwelling fire? Is it important that we always send 2 engines and 1 truck or is ok to do that sometimes and just send a mini-pumper sometimes or just 1 engine and 1 truck? Setting aside the "every fire is different" aspect, can we expect a consistent outcome, if we aren't consistent with how we respond to the same type of incident?

2) Is it important that the individual companies in the same department respond in the same manor (SOPs), operate in the expected manor, use the same concise terminology and format?

3) Dispatchers will always exhibit their own "style" in their dispatching. However, that must be done with compliance to their dispatching SOPs as consistently as possible. Would it be ok for a dispatcher to use 10-codes because it's their "style" when the SOPs clearly state they are not to be used and there are no locally adopted 10-code definitions?

If the SOP says the dispatch format is tones, address, complaint, company due, is a big deal if a dispatcher occasionally announces calls as tones, complaint, address, company due? I would say no, because nobody will be exactly consistent 100% of the time and the variation is minor. Does every dispatch have to be given as a monotone oration like tones, 123 Main Street, Building Fire, Company 5 respond? I would say no, the dispatcher can throw in a little style as long as they stick to the basic format and convey the required information in a timely fashion, like - tones, At 123 Main Street in Anytown for a report of a dwelling fire, Company 5 is due to respond.

[wraftery 1,275]

Ten codes are not considered common terminology except for 10-4, which is not a 10 code, but it is a word.

According ti the Cambridge Dictionary of Advanced Learning;

10-4 exclamation, Pronounced ten four;; An answer in the affirmative

[DES630 10]

How about coming into the 21st century and getting rid of all the unnecessary things places have in their dispatch and keeping it short and sweet. That way when there's a storm or tons of alarms you can still manage dispatching like professionals.

"60 control to XXX" Why do we need to say "60 Control to"? All the other stuff "all home units/monitors"

How about

Tones then "XXX respond to 222 Main Street between Leaf and Tree Streets for a indoor odor of smoke apartment 2B on the second floor"

If your dispatchers can't do it don't worry they have a computer that can.

As far as "60 control to xxx" can that be eliminated? Sure why not if it is a structured dept. Only those tones are being activated and who else would be dispatching them if not 60?

Now for non structured depts since no specific apparatus is being dispatched then 60-control to xxx dept sounds a little better.

Some of the extra you hear is because that is requested by the individual depts. some depts cover more then 1 community so they request that town or village be added to the dispatch.

Edited September 2, 2014 by DES630

[Remember585 815]

Consistency... the only consistency I see around Westchester is an increasing demand for service, reduced funding for said service and a lack of support for those providing said services. This doesn't just apply to dispatch, this goes for everyone in the field as well.

We should all be wearing toilet paper suits with the amount of sh!t thrown at us...

[antiquefirelt 994]

I do feel a little for dispatchers as the "customers" on one end are the callers requesting service and on the other end are us (some of the most hyper-critical people about everything we're involved in and some things we're not). The callertaker/dispatcher rarely hears feedback from the person who initiated the call (unless it's bad) as the responders provide the service they've requested and thus get the praise when its due, then we complain about our service from dispatch. In the end from the public's perspective it's all one system that send them the assistance they need. Our dispatch advisory board has asked departments to provide positive feedback as well as negative and to mention dispatch for those significant incidents that go well when talking to the media as these folks are often forgotten and have a large role in how the call might end up.

[SECTMB 612]

On a somewhat related, but not exactly relevant topic, can someone explain why I just heard Engine 1 and Engine 2 dispatched for a residential lock out? Really, two engines for a lock out?

[Bnechis 3,961]

On a somewhat related, but not exactly relevant topic, can someone explain why I just heard Engine 1 and Engine 2 dispatched for a residential lock out? Really, two engines for a lock out?

Each has only 1 FF or 1 captain. On a good day One will have a FF the other will have a FF & a Captain.

[AFS1970 504]

Here is the real problem with scripts (or what those who don't sit behind the console call consistency). Eventually you are saying words that you don't really understand. You get so used to reading the script that the words, like the example of 10-4, loose their actual meaning.

For years before plain language Stamford had some signals that were generally used together. THe two most common were 5, 7 & 9 or 1 & 5. These were so common that most units stopped using the word signal in front of them. However here is what they meant.

1 - In Service / On Air

5 - Returning to Quarters

7 - False Alarm

9 - Recall

However 1 & 5 was used so often as the generic signal that you were clear from a call that we started having EMS units who were not quartered at the hospital saying they were 1 & 5 out at the hospital. They can be 1 at the hospital but not 1 & 5. But they were being consistent.

There are also fads depending on who is reading what book at the time. We had a senior dispatcher with no field experience yell at a junio dispatcher who had been a member of 2 local departments and 1 out of town department because he didn't ask the color of the smoke that a caller was reporting. Also on a call with a report of a fire with children in side she yelled that the ages of the children were imnportant. The junior dispatcher asked why, did they rescue 4 years olds diferently from 5 year olds? But both of these theories were because of incomplete information given to dispatchers so they would be consistent with field units.

So if I dispatch a call and say attention all Turn of River Units and the next guy says attention Turn of River Fire Department, I don't see that is a problem. Trust me, we have lots of real problems to solve. We do not need to go making up more imaginary ones just so we can create a solution.

[FireMedic049 597]

Here is the real problem with scripts (or what those who don't sit behind the console call consistency). Eventually you are saying words that you don't really understand. You get so used to reading the script that the words, like the example of 10-4, loose their actual meaning.

For years before plain language Stamford had some signals that were generally used together. THe two most common were 5, 7 & 9 or 1 & 5. These were so common that most units stopped using the word signal in front of them. However here is what they meant.

1 - In Service / On Air

5 - Returning to Quarters

7 - False Alarm

9 - Recall

However 1 & 5 was used so often as the generic signal that you were clear from a call that we started having EMS units who were not quartered at the hospital saying they were 1 & 5 out at the hospital. They can be 1 at the hospital but not 1 & 5. But they were being consistent.

I don't think this is what we're discussing, so the problem you stated doesn't apply. What you've identified in your example are not "scripts", but rather "codes". The use of codes, like the 10-codes, is fine as long as everyone is consistently using them and using the same definitions otherwise it's like trying to communicate with one person speaking english and the other speaking spanish.

Scripts are typically the verbal dispatch format. As you correctly point out below, saying "all Turn of River Units" vs "Turn of River Fire Department" isn't the problem when talking about dispatch consistency. The issue is when information is left out or presented in a manor that is problematic for the field units.

In my county, the dispatch script is supposed to include the municipality that the call is in. The dispatchers are somewhat inconsistent with that. This may not be a problem if your department only responds to calls in a single municipality, but leads to issues when you don't. The ambulance I work part-time for in my city covers 4 municipalities and responds mutual aid into several more. We have a large number of street names that are common between 2 or more of our municipalities. Sometimes there are subtle clues, like one having 3 digit numbers and the other having 4 digits. Sometimes they give cross streets which help, but often enough we have to clarify it.

Another issue that we experience in my area is that our dispatchers are inconsistent with calls to commercial buildings. Every dispatch to a commercial building should include the business name along with the street address. Unfortunately, there are numerous instances where the business name is left out. This can create a response issue on the field side of things because unless you go to that business frequently for calls, you are far more likely to know where ABC Plumbing is on Main Street in your town vs driving down Main Street trying to find it using the street numbers on each building, which may or may not be there or readily visible.

In one case, an EMS call was dispatched to a street address in a neighboring community. Their EMS was not available, so mine was sent and given just a street address. That community's FD was dispatched (by a different dispatcher, same center) for QRS on the call, but were given the call as the street address and that it was the Jr High School in their town. The school sits back a long driveway off the street it is addressed to and is the only non-residential building on the street. There's a big sign for the school at the entrance, but it doesn't have the street number on it.

There are also fads depending on who is reading what book at the time. We had a senior dispatcher with no field experience yell at a junio dispatcher who had been a member of 2 local departments and 1 out of town department because he didn't ask the color of the smoke that a caller was reporting. Also on a call with a report of a fire with children in side she yelled that the ages of the children were imnportant. The junior dispatcher asked why, did they rescue 4 years olds diferently from 5 year olds? But both of these theories were because of incomplete information given to dispatchers so they would be consistent with field units.

So if I dispatch a call and say attention all Turn of River Units and the next guy says attention Turn of River Fire Department, I don't see that is a problem. Trust me, we have lots of real problems to solve. We do not need to go making up more imaginary ones just so we can create a solution.

[16fire5 693]

There are also fads depending on who is reading what book at the time. We had a senior dispatcher with no field experience yell at a junio dispatcher who had been a member of 2 local departments and 1 out of town department because he didn't ask the color of the smoke that a caller was reporting. Also on a call with a report of a fire with children in side she yelled that the ages of the children were imnportant. The junior dispatcher asked why, did they rescue 4 years olds diferently from 5 year olds? But both of these theories were because of incomplete information given to dispatchers so they would be consistent with field units.

You are hitting the nail on the head with this one. If we step back the real goal has to be to get the troops on the road to the correct address with the proper information fast. Some of the lines of questioning for both fire and ems are getting so complex that it's delaying dispatch. There are examples all around but yesterday I started reading Houston's report on the tragic fire they had last spring that killed 4 firefighters and injured many others. Their timeline showed 12:05:19 as the call received time for the first of the 17 911 calls for the fire. They voice dispatched the call at 12:07:55. 2 minutes and 36 seconds is too long. Most standards allow for a minute and dispatch centers who have made a concerted effort to address this and using the available technology are getting under that minute.

[10512 214]

Each has only 1 FF or 1 captain. On a good day One will have a FF the other will have a FF & a Captain.

This brings the thread to a completely different, yet highly important problem that is ignored by most Politicians and senior management.

[Morningjoe 162]

This brings the thread to a completely different, yet highly important problem that is ignored by most Politicians and senior management.

No, no... It's not a problem because nothing ever happens there. It's totally fine.

[AFS1970 504]

I used the codes as an old example of scripting gone bad. However I know of a dispatcher that was so into her scripts that she had hand written ones she made in training and could not even do a nightly tone test without them. The rest of us figured that we could probably get her to order a pizza over the air if we inserted the words into her scripts.

As for business names that is an uphill battle. We try to have business names stored in CAD but there is a big problem with a) names that change often or are never updated & alarms that give a different name than we have because the alarm lists the property owner and not the tenant. So going to ABC Real Estate is not at all helpful when you pull up to the local Burger King. The information is only as good as we get, and frankly we don't get very good information most of the time. In some districts they want the residence name for the same reason, some drivers know where the Smith's live as just that the Smith house, not as 1234 Farm Meadow Dr.

We had a couple of issues with giving out cross streets a few years back. Now as one of the people that helped set up of street file, we got blocks down to the smallest segment possible.

I had one FF complain that we were giving the wrong cross streets on several addresses, but every time we checked the map we were right. I finally asked him what he meant. He thought the cross streets should be specific to the side of the street the call was on, so if the only two streets on the left were a mile apart he wanted those instead of any of the six other streets on the right.

We also had a service that was adamant about getting cross streets on every call, even when you had a business name or a well known building. They were so in the habit of requesting cross streets that when going to an incident on i-95 once they asked for cross streets. A very senior dispatch supervisor from the fire department got on the air and gave them cross streets of Maine and Florida.

These are examples of why while admirable such drives for consistency often ends up removing the thinking / common sense form the process which is the exact opposite of helpful. By all means we should give out all location information we have on hand, however mandating that the map number be given before the apartment number of that the business name be given in between the cross streets is nothing more than micro managing.

Edited September 5, 2014 by AFS1970