Using Performance Measures to Evaluate Prevention Programs

The major parts of a comprehensive prevention program are the engineering, enforcement, education, and investigation activities that help reduce risk and loss within a community. This section addresses a basic management issue underlying all these components. Even though most people accept the concept that preventing an incident is cheaper than dealing with it after the fact, local decision makers must justify expenditures for every type of government service. Concerned taxpayers want to know what their tax dollars are producing and whether the services are managed efficiently.

Prevention programs are often the most difficult to evaluate because so many variables affect the loss data. However, some model performance measures are available that may help show whether prevention programs are producing the desired results and are doing so efficiently.

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board has developed evaluation measures that can be applied to fire department activities, although the board stipulates that comparing one jurisdiction with another is very difficult because the variables in jurisdictions are hard to match. The USFA, in conjunction with the California Polytechnic Institute, has also produced some model evaluation measures. The  International City/County Management Association, too, through its Center for Performance Measurement, has developed performance measures for prevention that include indicators connected with fire inspections, community risk reduction, and educational programs. Generally speaking, these indicators can be categorized as measures of workload, efficiency, and effectiveness, and as steps toward the identification of best practices. (Chapter 14 discusses performance measurement in detail.)

*This section continues with information on: workload measures, effectiveness measures, measuring risk reduction, and measuring loss reduction.

Staffing and Funding Options for Prevention Programs

Local decision makers will always want to know how many people it takes to do certain tasks—hence, the need to evaluate workload measures. However, a wide variety of staffing options are used in the fire and emergency services, and comparative data are as yet inadequate to identify a truly “best practice” model.

Looking at prevention programs in other jurisdictions will provide some ideas for improvements to the local prevention effort. Sometimes the best ideas come from a jurisdiction that is much smaller or much larger, so it is best not to restrict a survey to only jurisdictions of comparable size or population.

Local decision makers should also understand that not every idea can work effectively in their own jurisdictions. Local politics, agreements with professional unions, reliance on volunteers, and the needs of the local community are all relevant factors when departments are deciding on the most appropriate mix of services and staffing for their own areas.

And finally, local decision makers should be cautioned against expecting too much of any one staff position. Expecting one person to conduct plan reviews for new construction, enforce the fire code, make public fire and life safety presentations, and investigate fires may be unrealistic. If one person is given responsibility for all these tasks, the result may be inadequate expertise or attention—either of which can create legal liabilities. If a community’s resources are limited, the type and scope of prevention programs conducted in that community will necessarily also be limited.

*This section continues with information on staffing options for inspectors, public educators, and investigators.  It also discusses funding options beyond local tax dollars such as fees, grants, and fundraising.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpted from Managing Fire and Emergency Services, the newest title from ICMA Press (Jan. 2012) and the latest in the seminal series on fire services. Read other excerpts, "Comprehensive Prevention Programs Far, Far Beyond Code Enforcement and Coloring Books," which appeared in the January 10, 2012, issue of Local Government Matters; "Comprehensive Prevention Programs: Enforcing Fire and Safety Codes," which appeared in the January 24, 2012, issue; Educating the Public about Fire and Life Safety, which appeared in the February 21, 2012, issue; and Investigating Fires, which appeared in the April 3, 2012, issue.