Opposition to #KGPA-24-01 Public Comment from Daniel Munzing (3)From:Ming Lovejoy
To:Kalispell Meetings Public Comment
Subject:EXTERNAL Public comment re: Opposition to #KGPA-24-01: Tronstad Meadows and Whitetail Crossing Growth
Policy Amendment Application
Date:Sunday, May 19, 2024 8:13:40 PM
Attachments:4.%20Kalispell_MT_Draft_Fire_Report_24Aug%281%29-1.pdf
[NOTICE: This message includes an attachment -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you know the content is safe.]
To:
Kalispell City Council
201 First Avenue East
Kalispell, MT 59901
Re: Opposition to #KGPA-24-01: Tronstad Meadows and Whitetail Crossing Growth Policy
Amendment Application
Dear Honorable May Johnson and Members of the Kalispell City Council,
We are writing to express our strong opposition to the proposed amendment to the Kalispell
Growth Policy related to the Tronstad Meadows and Whitetail Crossing development,
identified by application #KGPA-24-01. As concerned residents of Kalispell, we believe that
this amendment poses significant risks to the well-being and future growth of our
community.
Inconsistent with Kalispell Growth Policy
The proposed extension of the city annexation boundary to include Tronstad Meadows and
Whitetail Crossing directly contradicts the objectives of the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan-It
2035 and the city’s Annexation Policy. These frameworks were meticulously crafted to
ensure orderly, sustainable growth that aligns with community values and existing land use.
Pushing through an amendment to the current growth policy appears to be a hasty shift in
direction designed to benefit a single piecemeal development nestled in and among rural
and agricultural areas, and serving the interests of one developer.
This is not in keeping with Kalispell's stated and current objectives in their own growth
policy.
Unlike the planned growth along the Highway 93 corridor, amending the growth policy for a
patchwork annexation of Tronstad Meadows and Whitetail Crossing is shortsighted,
undermines strategic planning efforts, and compromises the long-term vision for
sustainable development in Kalispell.
We support comprehensive plans as fundamental instruments that guide public planning
processes and prevent the piecemeal and patchwork alteration of land use policies to favor
individual interests over public welfare.
Given the public outcry on this issue, with over 500 signatures on a circulating petition,
packed turnout by residents sharing their opposition at the city planning board meeting, and
high levels of public comment raising many valid concerns and expressing strong
opposition, we ask that the city council reconsider this amendment and adhere to the
established growth policies that prioritize the collective interests and long-term vision for our
community.
Please vote no until and unless a thorough review and community consultation process is
conducted, ensuring that any amendments align with the principles of sustainable and
orderly growth as outlined in the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan-It 2035.
Economic and Environmental Concerns
Approving this amendment would strain the city’s resources and set a troubling precedent
for future developments that do not meet the needs of our community. The proposed
housing prices are unaffordable for many residents, contradicting the policy’s goal of
providing housing for all income levels.
An argument in favor of amending the current growth policy with an intention to annex and
build theTronstad Meadows / Whitetail Crossing development, is in direct opposition and
contradicts the the current growth policies stated intentions,
While the Staff Report recommends approval based on the provision of housing contained
in Growth Policy “for all sectors and income levels in the community” (Chapter 3, Goal 3),
this development will not provide affordable housing in the City.
Additionally, converting agricultural land into residential areas threatens local wildlife, water
quality, and the overall integrity of our rural landscape. We need to preserve our natural
resources and ensure any development aligns with our environmental sustainability goals.
Safety Concerns
The safety concerns associated with this development are significant. Increased traffic on
what is primarily a county road would lead to congestion and higher accident risks,
especially in currently quiet, rural areas. Our existing infrastructure may not be able to
handle this traffic volume, potentially compromising emergency response times.
Furthermore, the lack of adequate pedestrian pathways and cycling lanes in the proposed
development area poses serious risks to non-motorized road users, undermining our
commitment to creating safe, walkable, and bikeable neighborhoods.
Given the August 2023 CPSM report (see attached) which found Kalispell’s Emergency Medical
Services response times are currently over 5 minutes, (and that includes an average of all calls, not
the average response times for Silverbrook and outlying areas), this underscores the importance of
postponing approval of an amendment aimed at adding piecemeal and patchwork subdivisions that
are not substantially contiguous to existing city boundaries until the response time is within reason
and under 5 min.
Conclusion and Appeal
Given these points, we urge the Kalispell City Council to reject the #KGPA-24-01
application and maintain our commitment to a thoughtful, inclusive, and strategic approach
to growth. Let us ensure that our development policies reflect the needs and values of all
Kalispell residents, preserving the unique character and natural beauty of our area.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We are hopeful that you will consider the long-
term interests of our community and make a decision that aligns with the principles of
responsible and sustainable planning.
Sincerely,
Daniel Munzing
Ming Munzing
213 Tronstad Rd.
Kalispell
1
CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC
475 K STREET NW, STE. 702 • WASHINGTON, DC 20001
WWW.CPSM.US • 716-969-1360
Fire & EMS Operational
and Administrative
Analysis Report
Kalispell, Montana
Draft Report: August 2023
Exclusive Provider of Public Safety Technical Services for
International City/County Management Association
C
E
N
T
E
R
F
O
R
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
,
L
L
C
i
THE ASSOCIATION & THE COMPANY
INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (ICMA)
The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) is a 109-year-old, non-profit
professional association of local government administrators and managers, with approximately
13,000 members located in 32 countries.
Since its inception in 1914, ICMA has been dedicated to assisting local governments and their
managers in providing services to their citizens in an efficient and effective manner.
ICMA advances the knowledge of local government best practices with its website,
www.icma.org, publications, research, professional development, and membership.
CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT (CPSM)
The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management (ICMA/CPSM was launched by ICMA to
provide support to local governments in the areas of police, fire, and Emergency Medical
Services.
The Center also represents local governments at the federal level and has been involved in
numerous projects with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.
In 2014, as part of a restructuring at ICMA, the Center for Public Safety Management (CPSM)
spun out as a separate company and is now the exclusive provider of public safety technical
assistance for ICMA. CPSM provides training and research for the Association’s members and
represents ICMA in its dealings with the federal government and other public safety professional
associations such as CALEA, PERF, IACP, IFCA, IPMA-HR, DOJ, BJA, COPS, NFPA, etc.
The Center for Public Safety Management, LLC, maintains the same team of individuals
performing the same level of service that it had for ICMA. CPSM’s local government technical
assistance experience includes workload and deployment analysis using our unique
methodology and subject matter experts to examine department organizational structure and
culture, identify workload and staffing needs, and identify industry best practices.
We have conducted more than 400 such studies in 46 states and provinces and more than 275
communities ranging in population size 3,300 (Lewes, DE) to 800,000 (Indianapolis, IN).
Thomas Wieczorek is the Director of the Center for Public Safety Management.
Leonard Matarese serves as the Managing Partner for Research and Project Development.
Dr. Dov Chelst is the Director of Quantitative Analysis.
ii
CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT
PROJECT CONTRIBUTORS
Thomas J. Wieczorek, Director
Leonard A. Matarese, Director, Research & Project Development
Dov Chelst, Ph.D. Director of Quantitative Analysis
Joseph E. Pozzo, Senior Manager for Fire and EMS
Peter Finley, Senior Associate
Matt Gustafson, Associate
Xianfeng Li, Data Analyst
Monicque Lee, GIS Specialist
Dennis Kouba, Senior Editor
iii
CONTENTS
Tables ............................................................................................................................ vi
Figures ........................................................................................................................... ix
Section 1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 2
Section 2. Agency Review and Characteristics......................................................... 8
Governance and Finance ................................................................................................................... 10
Kalispell Fire Department ..................................................................................................................... 12
Administrative and Programmatic Staffing Review ...................................................................... 17
Operational Staffing Review............................................................................................................ 24
Organizational Guidelines and Policies ............................................................................................. 30
Community risk reduction .................................................................................................................... 37
Education and Training ........................................................................................................................ 45
ISO-PPC Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 53
Fleet Analysis.......................................................................................................................................... 59
KFD Facilities .......................................................................................................................................... 64
Section III. All-Hazards Risk Assessment of the Community ................................... 68
Population and Community Growth .................................................................................................. 68
Environmental Factors .......................................................................................................................... 81
Building and Target Hazard Factors ................................................................................................... 89
Summary and Observations: ........................................................................................................... 97
Transportation Factors .......................................................................................................................... 97
Summary and Observations: ......................................................................................................... 100
Fire and Fire-Related Incident Risk .................................................................................................... 100
EMS Risk ................................................................................................................................................ 102
Community Loss and Save Information ........................................................................................... 103
Fire and EMS Incident Demand ........................................................................................................ 104
Summary and Observations .......................................................................................................... 108
Resiliency.............................................................................................................................................. 108
Risk Categorization ............................................................................................................................. 112
Section 4. Fire and EMS Operations, Deployment, and Performance ................. 121
Current KFD Fire Operational Staffing and Service Delivery Model ............................................. 122
Fire Operations .................................................................................................................................... 127
Wildland-Urban Interface .............................................................................................................. 129
Fire Preplanning ............................................................................................................................... 131
iv
NFPA 1710 as a National Consensus Standard ............................................................................... 133
Code of Federal Regulations, NFPA 1500, Two-in/Two-Out ........................................................... 134
Effective Response Force and Critical Tasking ................................................................................ 136
KFD Fire Response Times ..................................................................................................................... 153
Travel Time ....................................................................................................................................... 162
KFD EMS Service Delivery Model ....................................................................................................... 171
Logan Health EMS Response Zone ................................................................................................... 178
automatic/Mutual Aid ....................................................................................................................... 185
Specialized Fire-Technical Response Capabilities .......................................................................... 190
Operational Planning Considerations and Recommendations ................................................... 193
Additional Facility Location Review ............................................................................................. 199
Regionalization ................................................................................................................................ 206
SECTION 5. Data Analysis ......................................................................................... 210
Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 211
Aggregate Call Totals ........................................................................................................................ 212
Calls by Type .................................................................................................................................... 212
Calls by Type and Duration ........................................................................................................... 215
Calls by Month and Hour of Day ................................................................................................... 216
Units Arrived at Calls ....................................................................................................................... 218
Workload: Runs and Total Time Spent .............................................................................................. 221
Runs and Deployed Time – All Units .............................................................................................. 221
Workload by Unit ............................................................................................................................. 225
Workload by Fire District ................................................................................................................. 227
Analysis of Busiest Hours ..................................................................................................................... 229
Response Time ..................................................................................................................................... 231
Response Time by Type of Call ...................................................................................................... 232
Response Time by Hour .................................................................................................................. 235
Response Time Distribution ............................................................................................................. 237
Response Time by Station Area ..................................................................................................... 240
Transport Call Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 241
Transport Calls by Type ................................................................................................................... 241
Average Transport Calls per Hour ................................................................................................. 242
Calls by Type and Duration ........................................................................................................... 244
Transport Time Components .......................................................................................................... 245
Attachment I: Additional Personnel ................................................................................................. 246
Attachment II: Actions Taken ............................................................................................................ 247
Attachment III: Fire Loss ...................................................................................................................... 248
v
Attachment IV: Historical Trends in Service...................................................................................... 249
Trend in Calls by Type ..................................................................................................................... 249
Trend in Workload ........................................................................................................................... 251
Trend in Response Time .................................................................................................................. 254
Trend in Transport Calls ................................................................................................................... 257
Attachment V: Logan Health Ambulance ...................................................................................... 258
Logan Health Ambulance Calls .................................................................................................... 258
Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Month and Hour of Day .................................................... 259
Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Type and Duration ............................................................. 260
Logan Health Ambulance Runs and Deployed Time ................................................................ 261
Logan Health Ambulance Workload by Fire District .................................................................. 262
Logan Health Ambulance Response Time by Type of Call ....................................................... 262
Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Type .................................................................... 264
Attachment V: Call Type Identification ........................................................................................... 266
vi
TABLES
TABLE 2-1: Calls by Type and Year .......................................................................................................... 13
TABLE 2-2: KFD Staffing Matrix .................................................................................................................. 26
TABLE 2-3: The Difference Between SOGs and SOPs ............................................................................ 31
TABLE 2-4: City of Kalispell ISO Earned Credit Overview ...................................................................... 56
TABLE 2-5: KFD Full Fleet Listing and Age ................................................................................................ 61
TABLE 2-6: KFD Fire Operations CIP, 2024–2028 ..................................................................................... 63
TABLE 2-7: KFD Ambulance CIP, 2024–2028 ........................................................................................... 63
TABLE 3-1: City of Kalispell Building Permits, 2012–2022 ........................................................................ 74
TABLE 3-2: City of Kalispell Retail, Commercial, and Industrial Projects, 2018–2022 ......................... 75
TABLE 3-3: City of Kalispell Residential Projects Completed or In Progress, 2018–2022 ..................... 78
TABLE 3-4: Largest Employers in Kalispell ................................................................................................ 80
TABLE 3-5: Potential Environmental Factors for Kalispell ....................................................................... 81
TABLE 3-6: Seismic Activity in Close Proximity to Kalispell ..................................................................... 84
TABLE 3-7: Sprinkler Status of High- to Mid-occupancy Buildings (2018) ............................................ 92
TABLE 3-8: Fire Call Types ........................................................................................................................ 101
TABLE 3-9: EMS Call Types ....................................................................................................................... 102
TABLE 3-10: Total Fire Loss Above and Below $25,000 ........................................................................ 103
TABLE 3-11: Property Loss 2018-2022 ..................................................................................................... 103
TABLE 3-12: Runs and Workload by Station and KFD Units ................................................................. 109
TABLE 3-13: Station Availability to Respond to Calls ........................................................................... 109
TABLE 3-14: Frequency of Overlapping Calls by First Due Station Area ........................................... 110
TABLE 3-15: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls ............................................................... 110
TABLE 3-16: Top 10 Hours with the Most Calls Received ..................................................................... 110
TABLE 3-17: Annual Workload by District .............................................................................................. 111
TABLE 3-18: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District ............................................................... 111
TABLE 3-19: Event Probability ................................................................................................................. 112
TABLE 3-20: Consequence to Community Matrix ............................................................................... 113
TABLE 3-21: Impact on the Kalispell Fire Department ......................................................................... 114
TABLE 4-1: KFD Staffing Matrix ................................................................................................................ 126
TABLE 4-2: Fire Calls by Call Type and Number of Arriving KFD Units ................................................ 141
TABLE 4-3: Calls by Type and Duration ................................................................................................. 141
TABLE 4-4: Structure Fire: Single-Family Dwelling, Low-Risk ................................................................. 143
TABLE 4-5: Structure Fire – Moderate Risk ............................................................................................. 145
TABLE 4-6: Structure Fire – High Risk ....................................................................................................... 145
TABLE 4-7: Fire Alarm System – Low Risk ................................................................................................ 146
TABLE 4-8: Fire Alarm System – Moderate Risk (Apartment/Commercial) ....................................... 146
TABLE 4-9: Fire Alarm System – High-Risk ............................................................................................... 147
TABLE 4-10: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type
(Minutes) .................................................................................................................................................. 161
vii
TABLE 4-11: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Area ................ 165
TABLE 4-12: EMS Calls by Type and Number, and Percent of All Calls ............................................. 174
TABLE 4-13: Transport Calls by Call Type............................................................................................... 176
TABLE 4-14: Time Component Analysis for Ambulance Transport Runs by Call Type ..................... 176
TABLE 4-15: Calls Responded to by Logan Health, by Type .............................................................. 180
TABLE 4-16: Annual Workload of Logan Health by District ................................................................. 181
TABLE 4-17: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Logan Health
Ambulance, by Call Type ...................................................................................................................... 182
TABLE 4-18: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Call Type ................................................ 184
TABLE 4-19: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Call Duration by Call Type ................................. 184
TABLE 4-20: Time Components for Logan Health Ambulance Transport Runs by Type.................. 185
TABLE 4-21: Annual Workload by District .............................................................................................. 187
TABLE 4-22: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District ............................................................... 188
TABLE 4-23: Kalispell/KFD Data Comparison, 2018 and 2022 ............................................................. 196
TABLE 5-1: Call Types ............................................................................................................................... 212
TABLE 5-2: Calls by Type and Duration ................................................................................................. 215
TABLE 5-3: Calls by Call Type and Number of Arriving Units ............................................................... 218
TABLE 5-4: Annual Runs and Deployed Time by Run Type ................................................................. 221
TABLE 5-5: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day ..................................................................... 223
TABLE 5-6: Runs and Workload by Station and Unit ............................................................................ 225
TABLE 5-7: Annual Runs by Run Type, Station, and Unit ...................................................................... 225
TABLE 5-8: Deployed Minutes per Day by Run Type, Station, and Unit ............................................ 226
TABLE 5-9: Annual Workload by District ................................................................................................ 227
TABLE 5-10: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District ............................................................... 227
TABLE 5-11: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls ............................................................... 229
TABLE 5-12: Top 10 Hours with the Most Calls Received ..................................................................... 229
TABLE 5-13: Frequency of Overlapping Calls by First Due Station Area ........................................... 230
TABLE 5-14: Station Availability to Respond to Calls ........................................................................... 230
TABLE 5-15: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type ........ 232
TABLE 5-16: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Hour of Day ... 235
TABLE 5-17: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit ....................................... 239
TABLE 5-18: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Area ................ 240
TABLE 5-19: Transport Calls by Call Type............................................................................................... 241
TABLE 5-20: Transport Calls per Day, by Hour....................................................................................... 242
TABLE 5-21: Transport Call Duration by Call Type ................................................................................ 244
TABLE 5-22: Time Component Analysis for Ambulance Transport Runs by Call Type ..................... 245
TABLE 5-23: Workload of Administrative Units ...................................................................................... 246
TABLE 5-24: Actions Taken Analysis for Structure and Outside Fire Calls .......................................... 247
TABLE 5-25: Total Fire Loss Above and Below $25,000 ........................................................................ 248
TABLE 5-26: Content and Property Loss – Structure and Outside Fires .............................................. 248
TABLE 5-27: Calls by Type and Year ...................................................................................................... 249
TABLE 5-28: Runs and Deployed Hours by Type and Year ................................................................. 251
viii
TABLE 5-29: Average Response Time by Year (in Minutes)................................................................. 254
TABLE 5-30: 90th Percentile Response Time by Year (in Minutes) ...................................................... 254
TABLE 5-31: Transport Call Volume by Type and Year ........................................................................ 257
TABLE 5-32: Call Responded to by Logan Health, by Type ................................................................ 258
TABLE 5-33: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Type and Duration ................................................. 260
TABLE 5-34: Logan Health Runs and Deployed Time by Type ........................................................... 261
TABLE 5-35: Logan Health Ambulance Workload ............................................................................... 261
TABLE 5-36: Annual Workload of Logan Health by District ................................................................. 262
TABLE 5-37: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Logan Health
Ambulance, by Call Type ...................................................................................................................... 262
TABLE 5-38: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Call Type ................................................ 264
TABLE 5-39: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Call Duration by Call Type ................................. 265
TABLE 5-40: Time Component for Logan Health Ambulance Transport Runs by Type ................... 265
TABLE 5-41: Call Type by NFIRS Incident Type Code and Description .............................................. 266
TABLE 5-42: Call Type by Emergency Medical Dispatch Code and Description ............................ 268
ix
FIGURES
FIGURE 2-1: City of Kalispell ........................................................................................................................ 8
FIGURE 2-2: Kalispell Population Growth, 1970–2022 .............................................................................. 9
FIGURE 2-3: Kalispell Organizational Chart ............................................................................................ 10
FIGURE 2-4: City of Kalispell Funding ....................................................................................................... 11
FIGURE 2-5: City of Kalispell Spending Allocations ................................................................................ 11
FIGURE 2-6: KFD Table of Organization ................................................................................................... 13
FIGURE 2-7: Calls by Type and Year ........................................................................................................ 14
FIGURE 2-8: Kalispell Fire Department Response Area (in Red) ........................................................... 17
FIGURE 2-9: Contemporary Chief Officer Roles ..................................................................................... 19
FIGURE 2-10: Forces Impacting the 21ST Century Fire and Emergency Services .............................. 20
FIGURE 2-11: Kalispell Municipal Boundaries, Urbanized Areas, and KFD Stations ............................ 25
FIGURE 2-12: Average Number of Personnel on Duty Each Day, January 1, 2022 to December 31,
2022 ............................................................................................................................................................ 28
FIGURE 2-13: KFD Overtime by Type, January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022 .................................. 28
FIGURE 2-14: Residential Fire Timeline ..................................................................................................... 40
FIGURE 2-15: Remote Video Inspection (RVI) ........................................................................................ 42
FIGURE 2-16: KFD Personnel Performing School Presentation .............................................................. 43
FIGURE 2-17: Probationary KFD Personnel Performing In-Station Training .......................................... 46
FIGURE 2-18: KFD Personnel Performing On-Duty Training ................................................................... 47
FIGURE 2-19: KFD Personnel Performing High-Intensity Training ........................................................... 48
FIGURE 2-20: Typical Fire Training Tower and Burn Building .................................................................. 51
FIGURE 2-21: ISO PPC Ratings in the U.S. ................................................................................................ 54
FIGURE 2-22: ISO PPC Ratings in Montana ............................................................................................. 55
FIGURE 2-23: Fire Service Response Time Algorithm – Turnout Time .................................................... 65
FIGURE 2-24: KFD Fire Stations .................................................................................................................. 66
FIGURE 3-1: Kalispell Population Increase, 1990–2022 .......................................................................... 69
FIGURE 3-2: Kalispell Population Increase Illustrated, 2018–2022 ......................................................... 69
FIGURE 3-3: Kalispell Zoning Districts and Annexation Boundaries ...................................................... 70
FIGURE 3-4: Kalispell Population Influx by Seasons ................................................................................ 72
FIGURE 3-5: Residential Development (Left) and Commercial, industrial, Healthcare, and
Government Development (Right), 2012–2018..................................................................................... 74
FIGURE 3-6: Map of City of Kalispell Retail, Commercial, and Industrial Projects, 2018–2022 ......... 77
FIGURE 3-7: Map of City of Kalispell Residential Projects Completed or In Progress, 2018–2022 .... 79
FIGURE 3-8: City of Kalispell “Opportunity Zone” .................................................................................. 80
FIGURE 3-9: Wildland Fire Probability, State of Montana ..................................................................... 82
FIGURE 3-10: WUI Influence, Flathead County / Kalispell ..................................................................... 83
FIGURE 3-11: Historical Regional Earthquakes ....................................................................................... 85
FIGURE 3-12: Skyles Lake Dam (Approximately 9.38 Miles From Kalispell) .......................................... 87
FIGURE 3-13: Distribution of Ash Fall From Historic Volcanic Eruptions ................................................ 89
FIGURE 3-14: Logan Health Campus ...................................................................................................... 91
x
FIGURE 3-15: Target Hazards (all) ............................................................................................................ 95
FIGURE 3-16: Principal Road Network for the City of Kalispell ............................................................. 98
FIGURE 3-17: Alternative Highway 93 Project ........................................................................................ 99
FIGURE 3-18: Fire Call Types Based on Percent ................................................................................... 101
FIGURE 3-19: EMS Calls Based on Percent ........................................................................................... 102
FIGURE 3-20: Fire Demand Density in Kalispell, All Fire Calls ............................................................... 105
FIGURE 3-21: Fire Demand Density in Kalispell, Structure and Outside Fires..................................... 106
FIGURE 3-22: EMS Demand Density in Kalispell, All EMS Calls ............................................................ 107
FIGURE 3-23: Calls by Hour of Day ........................................................................................................ 109
FIGURE 3-24: Three-Axis Risk Calculation .............................................................................................. 115
FIGURE 3-25: Low Risk .............................................................................................................................. 116
FIGURE 3-26: Moderate Risk ................................................................................................................... 117
FIGURE 3-27: High Risk ............................................................................................................................. 118
FIGURE 3-28: Special Risk ........................................................................................................................ 119
FIGURE 4-1: KFD Incident Increase, 2018–2022 .................................................................................... 122
FIGURE 4-2: KFD Station Locations......................................................................................................... 127
FIGURE 4-3: Kalispell Area Wildland-Urban Interface ......................................................................... 130
FIGURE 4-4: Two-In/Two-Out Interior Firefighting Model ..................................................................... 135
FIGURE 4-5: Initial Deployment of Firefighting Personnel/ERF Recommendation: Single-family
Dwelling .................................................................................................................................................... 144
FIGURE 4-6: Typical EMS ERF ................................................................................................................... 151
FIGURE 4-7: Typical EMS Response Matrix/Algorithm .......................................................................... 152
FIGURE 4-8: Response Time Performance Measures ........................................................................... 155
FIGURE 4-9: Incident Cascade of Events ............................................................................................. 155
FIGURE 4-10: Fire Propagation Curve ................................................................................................... 157
FIGURE 4-11: Fire Growth from Inception to Flashover ....................................................................... 158
FIGURE 4-12: Cardiac Arrest Survival Probability by Minute ............................................................... 159
FIGURE 4-13: Cerebrovascular Emergency (Stroke) Chain of Survival ............................................. 159
FIGURE 4-14: Sudden Cardiac Arrest Chain of Survival ...................................................................... 160
FIGURE 4-15: Fire Service Response Time Algorithm – Response Time to On Scene ....................... 164
FIGURE 4-16: Travel Time of 240 Seconds from KFD Stations .............................................................. 166
FIGURE 4-17: ISO-FSRS 1.5-Mile Response Circles for Engine Companies ......................................... 167
FIGURE 4-18: Travel Time of 360 Seconds from KFD Stations .............................................................. 168
FIGURE 4-19: Travel Time of 480 Seconds from KFD and Mutual Aid Stations .................................. 169
FIGURE 4-20: ISO-FSRS 2.5-Mile Response Circle for Ladder Company at Station 2 ....................... 170
FIGURE 4-21: Cardiac Arrest Survival Timeline ..................................................................................... 172
FIGURE 4-22: EMS Calls by Type ............................................................................................................. 174
FIGURE 4-23: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – EMS ......................................................................... 175
FIGURE 4-24: MIH/CP Umbrella .............................................................................................................. 177
FIGURE 4-25: Logan Health Complex Location ................................................................................... 179
FIGURE 4-26: Logan Health EMS Response Zone ................................................................................. 180
FIGURE 4-27: Logan Health EMS Calls in Designated Response Zone .............................................. 181
xi
FIGURE 4-28: Logan Health Station 240-Second Response Bleed ..................................................... 183
FIGURE 4-29: KFD and Automatic/Mutual Aid Partner Station Locations ........................................ 187
FIGURE 4-30: 480 Second Response Bleeds – Mutual Aid Stations .................................................... 189
FIGURE 4-31: Kalispell and Whitefish Firefighters Work on a Technical Rescue Incident ................ 191
FIGURE 4-32: KFD Personnel Performing Training on Technical Rescue ............................................ 192
FIGURE 4-33: 240-Second Travel Time Bleeds with Proposed Station 63 ........................................... 200
FIGURE 4-34: KFD New Station 63 with 360-Second Travel Time Bleeds ............................................ 201
FIGURE 4-35: KFD New Station 63 with ISO 1.5-Mile Engine Company Circles ................................. 201
FIGURE 4-36: KFD New Station 63 with ISO 2.5-Mile Ladder Company Circle ................................. 202
FIGURE 4-37: KFD Five-Station Configuration ....................................................................................... 203
FIGURE 4-38: KFD Relocated Station 61 and new Station 63 with 240-Second Travel Time Bleeds
.................................................................................................................................................................. 204
FIGURE 4-39: KFD Relocated Station 61 with 300-Second Travel Time Bleeds ................................. 205
FIGURE 4-40: KFD Relocated Station 61 with 360-Second Travel Time Bleeds ................................. 205
FIGURE 4-41: Recommended Long-Term KFD Organizational Structure .......................................... 209
FIGURE 5-1: EMS Calls by Type ............................................................................................................... 213
FIGURE 5-2: Fire Calls by Type ................................................................................................................ 213
FIGURE 5-3: Calls by Month .................................................................................................................... 216
FIGURE 5-4: Calls by Hour of Day........................................................................................................... 217
FIGURE 5-5: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – EMS ........................................................................... 219
FIGURE 5-6: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – Fire ............................................................................ 219
FIGURE 5-7: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day .................................................................. 224
FIGURE 5-8: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type – EMS ................................ 233
FIGURE 5-9: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type – Fire ................................. 233
FIGURE 5-10: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Hour of Day .................................... 236
FIGURE 5-11: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit – EMS .......................... 237
FIGURE 5-12: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit – Outside and Structure
Fires ........................................................................................................................................................... 238
FIGURE 5-13: Average Transport Calls per Day, by Hour .................................................................... 243
FIGURE 5-14: Calls by Type and Year .................................................................................................... 249
FIGURE 5-15: Runs by Type and Year .................................................................................................... 252
FIGURE 5-16: Deployed Hours by Type and Year ................................................................................ 252
FIGURE 5-17: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day and Year ............................................... 253
FIGURE 5-18: Average Response Time by Year ................................................................................... 255
FIGURE 5-19: Average Response Time by Hour of Day, by Year ....................................................... 255
FIGURE 5-20: Transport Calls by Type and Year ................................................................................... 257
FIGURE 5-21: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Month ................................................................... 259
FIGURE 5-22: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Hour of Day .......................................................... 259
FIGURE 5-23: Average Response Time of First Arriving Logan Health Ambulance, by Call Type .. 263
FIGURE 5-24: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Hour ...................................................... 264
1
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
The Center for Public Safety Management LLC (CPSM) contracted with the City of Kalispell to
complete an operational and administrative analysis of the city’s Fire Department.
The service demands and challenges generated by the community are numerous for the fire
department and the EMS ground transport provider and includes fire, technical rescue,
hazardous materials, building risk challenges; transportation emergencies; a vulnerable
population that drives EMS demand; and other non-emergency responses typical of municipal
fire departments and EMS providers.
A significant component of this report is the completion of a Community Risk Analysis. The All-
Hazards Risk Assessment of the Community contemplates many factors that cause, create,
facilitate, extend, and enhance risk in and to a community. The All-Hazards Risk Assessment of
the Community is an important component of this report as it links directly to staffing and
deploying fire and rescue assets in the community.
The response time and staffing components discussion of this report are designed to examine
the current level of service provided by the Kalispell Fire Department (KFD) as a baseline and are
compared to national best practices and standards. As well, these components provide
incident data and relevant information to be utilized for future planning and self-review of
service levels for continued improvement. This analysis and self-review are intended to help the
department to continue to meet community expectations and mitigate emergencies effectively
and efficiently.
Additional work includes an analysis of the current deployment of resources and the
performance of these resources in terms of response times and the KFD fire management zones;
a comprehensive review of the current ISO Public Protection Classification report; current staffing
levels and patterns; department resiliency (ability to handle more than one incident); critical
tasking elements for specific incident responses and assembling an effective response force;
community risk reduction and training; fleet; alternatives the city may consider regarding station
locations for future planning; and future organizational structures and deployment for fire and
EMS services in the city.
The comprehensive risk assessment and review of deployable assets, which are critical aspects
of a fire department’s operation, will first assist the KFD in quantifying the risks that it faces.
Second, the KFD will be better equipped to determine if the current response resources are
sufficiently staffed, equipped, trained, and positioned. The factors that drive the service needs
are examined and then link directly to discussions regarding the assembling of an effective
response force and when contemplating the response capabilities needed to adequately
address the existing risks, which encompasses the component of critical tasking.
Based upon CPSM’s detailed assessment of the KFD, it is our conclusion that overall, the KFD
provides quality fire, EMS, and rescue services. The fire staff are professional and dedicated to
the mission of their agency, were transparent during our discussions, and were quite focused on
creating a positive future for the city.
This report also contains a series of observations, planning objectives, and recommendations
that are intended to help the city deliver services more efficiently and effectively. CPSM
recognizes there may be recommendations and considerations offered that first must be
budgeted and/or bargained, or for which processes must be developed prior to
implementation.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
Administrative and Programmatic Staffing
(See pp. 17-24.)
1. As a planning objective, the City of Kalispell and KFD should consider the creation of a full-
time position of EMS Coordinator at the rank of Captain. This position should continue to
have the requirement that the person holding it must be a currently certified paramedic and
hold that certification for the duration of their time in the position.
2. As a planning objective, the current position of Assistant Fire Chief should be formally
redefined as Assistant Chief for Operations: Second-in-command of the department
(“executive officer”) responsible for the direct supervision of the Captains, daily operational
activities, personnel management, facilities, apparatus, and equipment. The Fire Chief
should continue to delegate significant management responsibility and authority to the
Assistant Fire Chief.
3. As a planning objective, the City of Kalispell should create a full-time position of Training and
Safety Officer for the KFD, at the rank of Captain, to oversee, coordinate, and conduct all
fire and EMS training for department personnel. The position of Training Officer should be
separated from the Assistant Fire Chief position. The Training and Safety Officer should report
directly to the Assistant Fire Chief.
4. Long-term, if the above positions are created, the City of Kalispell will need to consider the
addition of an additional administrative assistant to the KFD administrative support staff.
5. CPSM recommends the KFD develop and implement a comprehensive strategic plan that
incorporates measurable and obtainable administrative, operational, fiscal, and
programmatic goals and objectives. CPSM further recommends this strategic planning
document cover the near-, mid-, and long-term, and be updated as appropriate at the end
of the mid-term period.
General Staffing
(See pp. 24-29.)
6. The City of Kalispell should review the current staffing model and collective bargaining
agreement while simultaneously exploring other staffing and shift schedule models/options
to seek alternatives to the current allotment of 20 Kelly Days. The goal of this review is to be
able to work toward increasing daily on-duty staffing levels.
Organizational Policies and Guidelines
(See pp. 30-37.)
7. Rules and regulations establish expected levels of conduct and general obligations of
department members, identify prohibited activities, and provide for the good order and
discipline necessary for the credible operation of a quasi-military emergency services
organization. The KFD should form a management-labor committee to develop a
comprehensive rules and regulations document that identifies anticipated, acceptable/
permitted, and prohibited behaviors. This document should be distributed to and signed by
each member of the department. It will also provide important guidance to new employees.
8. The KFD should continue to make the revamping of the department’s policies, procedures,
and guidelines a high priority. In addition to the documents already completed and/or in
development, attention should be given to mission-critical procedures such as, but not
limited to, basic engine company and truck company operations, dwelling fires, commercial
structures, mid-rise buildings, industrial incidents, personnel accountability, hazardous
3
materials incidents, vehicle extrication operations, thermal imaging camera and automatic
external defibrillator use, and mass-casualty incidents. The addition of numerous other
procedures covering additional operational, routine administrative, and training procedures
should then follow.
9. In order for its materials to not be confused with city policies, the KFD should consider not
utilizing the term “policy” in its documents. This should be changed to either “Procedure” or
“Guideline” for all documents. AS well, all documents should be combined into a single
manual with appropriate sections.
10. The general format and organization of the SOP/SOG manual is a very important
consideration and the department must ensure that the manual/system is easy to utilize, with
cross-referencing of the necessary procedures. If personnel are going to be required to learn
and adhere to the department’s procedures, then the format, organization, and filing of
them must be user-friendly, otherwise they will sit on a shelf, or on a computer drive, unused.
11. The KFD is strongly encouraged to carry through with the plan to establish a committee to
review and assist with revisions to the SOG manual in the future. The committee should be
comprised of members of each rank and include specific representation by a senior officer
of the collective bargaining unit.
12. The KFD should institute a process for issuing General Orders, Training Bulletins, Safety Bulletins,
and Informational Bulletins. A numbering system should be implemented to keep track of
these documents for indexing and future reference purposes.
Community Risk Reduction
(See pp. 37-45.)
13. As a long-term planning objective, the City of Kalispell should consider re-establishing a full-
service Fire Prevention Bureau within the KFD. This bureau should be staffed, at a minimum,
with a Fire Marshal (rank of Captain) and one fire inspector (Fire Marshal and inspector
should also be certified to perform fire investigations). The focus of their activities should be
on post-occupancy fire prevention inspections, code enforcement, and education of
business and building owners.
14. The KFD should implement an in-service company inspection program at residential,
medical, manufacturing, and retail business establishments throughout the city.
15. To fund the KFD’s fire prevention and safety activities the City of Kalispell should consider the
adoption of registration, inspection, and/or permit fees to help offset the actual costs of
providing these services throughout the city. These fees should include inspections
conducted by in-service fire companies.
16. The KFD should develop a compelling public education program that includes discussing the
significant life-saving benefits of installing residential fire sprinklers in all new one- and two-
family dwellings.
17. The City of Kalispell should explore possible funding opportunities to encourage businesses to
install smoke alarms and sprinkler systems.
18. If the City of Kalispell authorizes the formation of a full-service Fire Prevention Bureau within
the KFD, the KFD should explore the feasibility of utilizing Remote Video Inspections (RIV) to
assist with managing the inspection workload.
19. The KFD should encourage—and if possible, expand—the voluntary home inspection and
assistance program. This is a Best Practice. The program should continue to include the
distribution of smoke detectors to the community.
4
20. The KFD should provide an inventory of smoke alarms for fire apparatus and ambulances to
take on all calls for installation in residential structures. This recommendation includes a
program where companies conduct free smoke alarm checks on all calls when possible.
21. The KFD should provide training on basic fire cause and origin determination to all officers.
This will assist with ensuring the cause of every fire that causes damage or injury is determined
while easing the workload for the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief.
Education and Training
(See pp. 45-51.)
22. The KFD should make it a priority to implement daily in-station training lasting one to two
hours each duty day.
23. The KFD should continue to develop and budget for its company fire officer training and
development program. To further enhance the program the department should consider
components that are competency-based on National Fire Protection Association (NFPA),
International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), and International Fire Service Training
Association (IFSTA) standards, and that focus on contemporary fire service issues including
community fire protection and emergency services delivery approaches, fire prevention
practices, firefighter safety and risk management, and labor/staff relations; reviewing,
approving, or preparing technical documents and specifications, departmental policies,
standard operating procedures and other formal internal communications; improving
organizational performance through process improvement and best practices initiatives;
and having a working knowledge of information management and technology systems.
24. The KFD should consider increasing the requirements for further step advancements at the
Captain level.
25. The KFD should develop task books for firefighter, Engineer, and each Captain step. For ranks
other than probationary firefighter, all personnel aspiring for promotion to a higher rank
should successfully complete all elements of that rank’s task book to be eligible to
participate in the formal promotional testing process.
26. The KFD should develop a plan—including providing appropriate funding—to provide all
companies and personnel with mandatory, off-duty, high-intensity training on various
subjects, including periodic live fire training on at least a semi-annual basis, with quarterly
being preferred.
27. The KFD should institute written and practical skills testing and proficiency evaluations (non-
punitive) as part of the department’s comprehensive fire training program.
28. The City of Kalispell in consultation with the KFD should consider providing funding for the KFD
to procure an appropriate training facility where the department can safety perform
NFPA 1403-compliant live fire training and other basic and advanced/complex evolutions for
all personnel on at least a semi-annual (quarterly preferred) basis. Consideration should also
be given to approaching this project as a county-wide or regional endeavor.
29. The KFD should make a concerted effort to send as many officers as possible to the National
Fire Academy (NFA). This should include the Assistant Chief (or future dedicated Training
Officer) for various training-related classes, and the Fire Marshal (if the city re-establishes a
dedicated fire prevention bureau within the Fire Department) for fire prevention and
community risk reduction classes. Any officers who meet the admissions criteria should be
encouraged to enroll in the Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program.
30. The KFD should look for opportunities to provide periodic joint training between the
department and various agencies that provide automatic/mutual aid to the city, including
5
in the evening and on weekends. Consideration should also be given to hosting large-scale
exercises to test and evaluate regional interoperability.
31. CPSM recommends new apparatus (including the recently ordered pumper and
ambulance) and staff/command vehicles be designed with clean cab concepts.
32. CPSM recommends that after the new ladder scheduled for purchase in FY 2028 is delivered,
that the existing quint apparatus be retained as a reserve ladder. This will also help the city’s
ISO rating and more importantly not leave the city without an aerial when the primary ladder
is out of service for any reason, or committed to mutual aid, training, etc.
All-Hazards Risk Assessment
(See pp. 52-119.)
33. KFD should address the wildland threat from surrounding WUI areas. This should include
working with the county on evacuation systems (zones, maps, notifications, evacuation
centers, etc.), staffing policies for high fire periods (Red Flag weather), review of mutual and
automatic aid agreements, etc.
34. KFD should conduct regional mutual aid agency drills that address issues such as mass
shootings.
35. CPSM recommends fire staff attend and participate in Move the 2040 committee and be an
active voice on street improvement initiatives.
36. CPSM recommends the city consider pre-emption emergency vehicle right-of-way street
light technology.
Fire Operations
(See pp. 126-128.)
37. The KFD should build at least a portion of its training regimens and tactical strategies around
the exterior or transitional attack for when the fire scenario and the number of available
units/responding personnel warrants this approach.
38. In acknowledgement of the fact that the KFD operates in a minimal staffing mode and
recognizing the potential for rapid fire spread, particularly in the more densely developed
areas of the city, the KFD should equip all its apparatus with the appropriate appliances and
hose and develop standardized tactical operations that will enable arriving crews to quickly
deploy high-volume fire flows of 1,200 to 1,500 gallons per minute (if the water supply will
permit this), utilizing multiple hose lines, appliances, and master stream devices. This flow
should be able to be developed within four to five minutes after the arrival of an apparatus
staffed with three personnel.
Wildland-Urban Interface
(See pp. 128-130.)
39. The KFD should address the wildland threat from surrounding WUI areas. This should include
working with the county on evacuation systems (zones, maps, notifications, evacuation
centers, etc.), staffing policies for high fire periods (Red Flag weather), review of mutual and
automatic aid agreements, etc.
40. The City of Kalispell should consider becoming a fire-adapted community (FAC)
collaborating to identify its wildfire risk and working collectively on actionable steps to
reduce its risk of loss. Part of this process should include the creation of a written assessment
of risks using a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) or Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan.
6
Fire Preplanning
(See pp. 130-132.)
41. CPSM recommends that as a planning objective, the KFD should continue to make pre-
fire/incident plan development a high priority until such time as plans have been developed
for all high- and medium-hazard occupancies located in the city, placing a high priority on
those identified structures that are not protected by automatic sprinkler systems. In addition,
pre-plans should be uploaded onto computers/tablets and the CAD system so they will be
more readily available to personnel on the incident scene.
42. The KFD should compile an inventory of the locations of vacant and unsafe structures
throughout the city and mark them accordingly with regard to offensive or defensive-only
fire suppression operations.
Response Metrics and Response Times
(See pp. 152-161.)
43. The KFD should work with the Flathead County Emergency Communications leadership to
identify and attempt to correct the reasons for the extended dispatch times shown in the
study year data.
44. The KFD should aggressively take whatever steps are necessary to significantly improve
turnout times for both fire and EMS incidents. This will serve to reduce and improve overall
response times to emergency incidents.
EMS Service Delivery
(See pp. 170-177.)
45. The KFD should work with its medical director and other community stakeholders to
determine the role that an MIH/CP program could play in working with high utilizers and
other patients within Kalispell who would benefit from this type of service model.
Logan Health EMS Response Zone
(See pp. 177-184.)
46. The KFD should work with Logan Health to identify the reasons for the elongated dispatch,
turnout, and travel times for the Logan Health EMS response zone. Once deficiencies have
been identified, appropriate actions should be taken to mitigate these issues.
47. Logan Health EMS should only be dispatched alone and/or as the first due ambulance to
medical calls that originate from within the Logan Health medical complex such as doctors’
offices, diagnostic facilities, etc. EMS calls that occur in the neighborhoods adjacent to the
Logan Health complex should be handled by the KFD utilizing normal response protocol.
Mutual/Automatic Aid
(See pp. 184-189.)
48. The KFD should formalize, in writing, its automatic and mutual aid agreements with all its
neighboring departments. Written agreements codify an understanding between two or
more entities to provide support in a given context. The primary purpose is to support each
other’s response efforts in an emergency.
49. The City of Kalispell and KFD should require that personnel who staff fire and rescue
organizations that respond into the city on mutual aid possess the same minimum levels of
training (Firefighter I and II) that Kalispell personnel are required to maintain.
50. The City of Kalispell and KFD mutual aid agreements with surrounding fire departments
should stipulate the minimum required training standards for personnel who may respond
7
into the city to assist. The agreements should also stipulate that the ranking officer of each
entity must certify in writing on an annual basis that his/her personnel comply with the
standards.
Planning Recommendations and Considerations
(See pp. 192-208.)
51. CPSM recommends that as a planning objective that over the next three fiscal years the city
enhance KFD staffing levels as shown here.
□ Year 1 – Increase minimum on-duty staffing to 8 personnel.
● Hire one additional firefighter and reassign current D Platoon firefighters to A, B, and C
Platoons to increase maximum shift staffing to 11 personnel.
● Separate the training and safety functions from the Assistant Fire Chief position and
create and fill a position of Training and Safety Officer at the rank of Captain.
● Upgrade the position of EMS Coordinator from a part-time to a full time position at the
rank of Captain.
● Total additional positions = three (3).
□ Year 2 – Add one additional firefighter per shift (three total positions) and increase minimum
on-duty staffing to nine personnel at all times. The maximum shift staffing would be
12 personnel.
□ Year 3 – Add one additional firefighter per shift (three total positions) and increase minimum
on-duty staffing to 10 personnel at all times. This will allow the city to staff two ambulances
and two fire suppression units 24/7. Having the ability to staff two EMS units 24/7 will eliminate
the need for most EMS mutual aid into the city, which will reduce potential revenue loss. The
maximum shift staffing would be 13 personnel.
52. As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that the City of Kalispell consider options for the
next CBA negotiations with the goal of aligning Kelly Day hours with the FLSA work period as
outlined in 29 U.S.C 207(k) and utilize this alignment to help increase on-duty staffing.
53. As a planning objective, CPSM further recommends the city review all options for increasing
EMS revenues. This should include the continual review of in-house EMS billing to ensure
collection of revenues is maximized to the fullest extent allowable by law, with a focus on
closing the gap between billed services and collected revenues; consideration of service
fees with areas outside of the city boundaries that the KFD provides EMS transport to; and
reconsideration of the city EMS tax levy at a rate sufficient to offset general fund transfers
needed to sustain the ambulance fund.
54. As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that the City of Kalispell proceed with plans for
the construction of Fire Station 63 in its proposed location at Farm to Market Drive and
Mountain Vista Drive.
55. The City of Kalispell leadership, both city and fire department, should lobby their local
legislators to seek passage of House Bill 813 that would allow the creation of regional fire
authorities.
56. As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that with the opening of Station 63, the City of
Kalispell should create a position of Shift Commander (three additional positions) who would
serve as the on-duty shift commander and respond in a command vehicle to incidents.
8
SECTION 2. AGENCY REVIEW AND
CHARACTERISTICS
The City of Kalispell is in Flathead County, which is in the northwestern portion of Montana and is
contiguous with Canada on its northern border. Kalispell was incorporated in 1892; it is in the
south-central portion of Flathead County. Kalispell serves as the county seat of the county and is
the gateway to Glacier National Park.
FIGURE 2-1: City of Kalispell
The city encompasses an area of 12.43 square miles and has a mix of commercial, industrial,
residential, recreation, and rural areas.1 The 2020 area of the city was 0.79 of a square mile
(+6.8 percent) larger than the 11.64 square miles at the 2010 census.2
The official 2020 census population was 24,558 which represents a 23.2 percent increase over the
2020 population of 19,927.3 According to the U.S Census Bureau the estimated 2022 population
was 28,450 which is an additional 15.7 percent in just those two years.4 The estimated 2023
population increased again to 29,409.5 The city’s population has doubled since 2000. Since 2020,
the Kalispell region has been Montana’s fastest growing area. Kalispell is the fastest growing
micropolitan area in the United States.6 A 2017 document prepared by the city titled City of
Kalispell Growth Policy Plan It 2035 projects the need for 3,000 additional housing units by 2035.7
Based upon the growth experienced in the past several years, it is likely that projection will be
low. The next figure shows the city’s population and percentage increase for each census from
1970 through 2020 plus estimates since the 2020 census.
1. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/kalispellcitymontana/INC110221
2. ibid
3. ibid
4. ibid
5. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/kalispell-mt-population
6. https://www.kalispell.com/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/206
7. https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/465/Kalispell-Growth-Policy-Plan-It-2035-PDF
9
FIGURE 2-2: Kalispell Population Growth, 1970–2022
The city’s largest employer is Logan Health Medical Center and its supporting operations, which
together employ more than 1,000 people. Weyerhaeuser (formerly Plum Creek Manufacturing)
employs more than 500 people.
In the walkable downtown and surrounding
areas, one can find museums (Conrad
Mansion Museum, Northwest Montana
History Museum, Hockaday Museum of Art,
Montana Modern Fine Art), performing arts
venues, art galleries, restaurants, and other
businesses and events. Kalispell Parks and
Recreation maintains 445 acres of parkland
and natural open space that ranges from
large urban and community parks to mini
parks. Nearby are two of Montana’s Tribal Nations—the Blackfeet Nation and the Flathead
Nation, Home to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.
Kalispell also serves as a base for people engaging in year-round outdoor activities including
hiking, biking, hunting, skiing, etc. The city is just a short drive to both Glacier National Park and
Flathead Lake, which is the largest freshwater lake west of the Mississippi River.
Kalispell was founded by Charles Edward Conrad, a businessperson and banker from Fort
Benton, Montana, who formed the Kalispell Townsite Company with three other men and began
selling lots in the Spring of 1891. Kalispell was officially incorporated as a city in 1892.
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2022
Kalispell Population 10,526 10,648 11,917 14,223 19,927 24,558 28,450
+1.2%+11.9%
+19.4%
+40.1%
+23.2%
+15.7%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Kalispell Population
10
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE
The city operates under a council-manager form of government. The City Council is comprised
of a Mayor and eight council members, all of whom are elected on a nonpartisan basis. The
Mayor is elected for a four-year term, while council members are elected by district to
staggered four-year terms, with four council members elected every two years. The City Council
appoints the City Manager to carry out the governing policies and ordinances established by
the council, and to oversee the day-to-day operations of the city.
Kalispell operates under a traditional organizational chart. The City Manager reports directly to
the City Council, with major functional offices and departments reporting to the City Manager.
The major departments and offices reporting to the City Manager include Police, Fire, Public
Works, Finance, Human Resources, Building Official, Planning, Building, Community
Development, Parks and Recreation, Information Technology, City Clerk, and the City Attorney.
The organization chart for the city is shown in the following figure.
FIGURE 2-3: Kalispell Organizational Chart
A Finance Director handles all budget, accounting, payroll, and accounts payable for the city
and reports directly to the City Manager. The Finance Director oversees the Assistant Finance
Director, City Treasurer, Assessment Coordinator, Accounts Payable, and Utility Billing. The annual
budgeting process begins in January and concludes with the adoption of the budget in June for
implementation on July 1.
The property tax rate in Montana is referred to as millage; the basic unit is 1 mill. One mill is equal
to 1/1,000 of a dollar. Or, more simply, at a tax rate of 1 mill, for every $1,000 in taxable value a
property owner will pay $1 in property tax. The City of Kalispell General Fund is used to account
for all resources and expenditures not specifically accounted for in other funds such as the
Ambulance Fund, which is a special revenue fund. The FY 2022-2033 budget was adopted in
June 2022 with authorized total general fund expenditures of $14,176,069, which was about
$550,000 less than the FY 2021-2022 budget.8
8. City of Kalispell FY 2022-2023 Budget
11
FIGURE 2-4: City of Kalispell Funding
In the current budget, $4,188,272 is allocated for fire and rescue services, an increase of
8.38 percent over the previous year. The fire and rescue budget accounts for 30.8 percent of
general fund expenditures.9
FIGURE 2-5: City of Kalispell Spending Allocations
The Ambulance Fund was created by City of Kalispell Ordinance #439 on April 18, 1932. The
purpose of the Ambulance Fund is to receive and deposit all funds generated for the use and
operation of the city’s ambulance, and in turn pay out expenditures from this fund for the
maintenance and operation of the city’s ambulance. Pursuant to the ordinance, no money
may be paid out of the Ambulance Fund, except by order of the City Council. The Ambulance
9. City of Kalispell FY 2022-2023 Budget
12
Fund was converted to a Special Fund during the FY 2007/2008 budget process by the then
Finance Director.
KALISPELL FIRE DEPARTMENT
The Kalispell Fire Department was formed on May 17, 1892, after several significant fires had
occurred in the community. In 1934, the department became a fully career department.
Chapter 9, Article 1, subsection 9-1 of the Kalispell Municipal Code establishes the Fire
Department of the city. Additional subsections of Chapter 9 provide for qualifications of
firefighters, certain disciplinary actions and appeal rights of collective bargaining unit members,
the powers and duties of the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief, as well as operational matters of
the fire department and certain unlawful acts affecting fire department service delivery.
Subsection 9-7-1 establishes false alarm fees for both the fire and police departments. The
delivery of Emergency Medical Services at both the first response and transport levels is
operated out of and managed by the Fire Department.
Today The Kalispell Fire Department (KFD) is a full-service, career public safety organization. The
department’s total authorized strength is 35 personnel of which 34 are sworn firefighters. Of
these, 30 are assigned to the department’s three operational shifts, and two are assigned to a
day work schedule from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. As a Montana Class 1 city with a population
greater than 10,000, Kalispell is required by state law to have a fully career fire department. The
use of call or volunteer personnel is not permitted. The following figure illustrates the
organizational chart of the KFD.
13
FIGURE 2-6: KFD Table of Organization
As the population of the city has increased, so have the calls for emergency services provided
by the KFD. The next table and figure illustrate the increase in calls for service over the five-year
period of 2018 through 2022.
TABLE 2-1: Calls by Type and Year
Year EMS Fire Other Total
2018 2,567 506 404 3,477
2019 2,502 586 468 3,556
2020 2,561 688 477 3,726
2021 2,966 666 504 4,136
2022 3,067 670 556 4,293
14
FIGURE 2-7: Calls by Type and Year
During this five-year time period:
■ Total call volume increased 23 percent from 3,477 in 2018 to 4,293 in 2022.
■ EMS calls increased 19 percent from 2,567 in 2018 to 3,067 in 2022.
■ Fire calls increased 32 percent from 506 in 2018 to 670 in 2022.
■ Other calls (canceled and mutual aid combined) increased 38 percent from 404 in 2018 to
556 in 2022.
The KFD has established a mission statement. When truly accurate, the mission statement should
provide the very foundation for the organization, its operations, and why it exists. The mission
statement should be providing that broad direction that everything else that the organization
does is going to be built upon.
KFD Mission Statement:
Services of the department include:
■ Fire protection and suppression.
■ Emergency medical services (EMS), first responder, and transport at the Advanced Life
Support (ALS) level.
Protecting our community with the highest level of professionalism, which
is accomplished through highly trained firefighters, a focus on community
education, and nationally recognized emergency medical skills.
15
■ Fire company fire inspections (limited).
■ Pre-fire/incident planning.
■ All-hazards public education.
■ Fire cause and origin investigation.
■ Fire hydrant inspections (limited).
■ Multidisciplinary technical rescue.
■ Ice rescue.
■ Hazardous materials response and mitigation (leak and spill/operations response) as host of
the Northwest Hazardous Materials Response Team.
■ Support to the Kalispell Police Special Response Team.
■ Automatic/mutual aid to neighboring jurisdictions.
The KFD is led by a Fire Chief who is aided by an Assistant Fire Chief in the day-to-day leadership
and administration of the department. Based on our observations, we found the Chief and
Assistant Chief form a cohesive leadership team. The chiefs were passionate about their agency
and the community. The Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief are assisted by a civilian
Administrative Assistant who performs a wide range of support duties including handling EMS
third-party billing.
The Fire Chief simultaneously holds the title of Fire Marshal, which in Kalispell has limited duties
and responsibilities primarily related to the determination of fire cause and origin. Most of the
technical services linked to community risk reduction, which includes fire prevention code
enforcement, fire and life safety elements of building plans review, new construction inspections,
etc., are handled by the Planning, Building, and Community Development Department. The KFD
has no formal Fire Prevention Division or unit as do most fire departments.
The Assistant Fire Chief also simultaneously serves as the department’s training officer responsible
for maintaining and providing compliance records for state, local, and federal training
mandates. The Chief does not deliver a lot of training personally but does have a cadre of
instructors available to assist.
Ancillary assignments such as health and safety, community outreach and education,
information technology, radios, shift scheduling, employee conduct, fleet and facility
management, and EMS coordination and oversite (continuing education, quality improvement
as examples) are distributed among the department’s officers. Managing these and other items
are typically done via individual positions (EMS Coordinator oversees the wide ranging facets of
the EMS delivery system.) or assigned to administrative positions (Assistant Chief provides shift
scheduling assignments, as an example).
Our team also noted the impact on the officers performing these duties while still maintaining
focus on operations, crew safety, and productivity. All the officers we interacted with appear to
be high-functioning and very professional despite their workload, which is quite substantial.
During our station visits crews were very welcoming, professional, forthcoming, and were
supportive of the Chief and Assistant Chief’s efforts and skills. They did express concerns about
staffing and the increasing call volume coupled with the city’s rapid growth. These issues will be
discussed later in this report. The KFD crew members we interacted with also appeared to be
passionate about the department and the community. The CPSM team was fortunate to be
able to spend a good amount of time with KFD personnel and visiting the stations.
16
The department staffs two fire stations, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with a minimum of seven
personnel on duty during the day, and six overnight. Station 61, which also serves as the
department’s administrative headquarters, is located at 312 1st Avenue, East, in downtown
Kalispell. Engine 631, Reserve Engine 633, Medic 621, Haz Mat truck 673, and trailer 670 along
with several administrative, support, and command vehicles, are housed there. Station 61 staffs
Engine 631 with a minimum of three personnel at all times. The medic unit is not staffed at this
station unless the city-wide on-duty staffing is at least eight personnel.
Station 62 is located at 255 Old Reserve Dr. in the northern part of the city. It houses Ladder 642,
Medics 622 and 624, Brush 681 (Type 6/wildland), and Utility 673. Station 62 normally cross-staffs
Ladder 642 and Medic 622. When staffing is at seven personnel, which the KFD attempts to
maintain daily from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., this station is staffed with four personnel and medic
624 can be staffed. This crew also staffs the other units on an as-needed basis. The unit or units
that respond are based upon the nature of the incident.
Emergency medical services (EMS) for the City of Kalispell are provided at the advanced life
support (ALS)/paramedic level by the KFD. The department has provided EMS since 1932, long
before most fire departments expanded their missions to include this service. It was the first
formal EMS service in the area, and originally provided service throughout Flathead County. In
1994, the KFD implemented the current ALS service with a goal of improving patient outcomes,
particularly for critical, life-threatening emergencies.
Advanced life support or ALS-level care refers to prehospital interventions that can be brought
into the field by paramedics. Typically, this service level includes the ability to bring much of the
emergency room capability to the patient. Paramedics can administer intravenous fluids,
manage a patient’s airway, provide drug therapy, utilize the full capabilities of a 12-lead
cardiac monitor, and provide a vital communication link to the medical control physician who
can provide specific medical direction based on the situation.
Prior to the implementation of the ALS service, when the fire department received a call for a
serious medical emergency, the ambulance, or another public safety responder would respond
to the hospital emergency room to pick up a nurse who could provide advanced care during
on-scene treatment and transport. When the ALS service was first initiated the KFD provided the
service to much of Flathead County. In the intervening years, as more areas have initiated their
own service at the paramedic level, the department’s primary response area has been reduced
significantly.
The next figure illustrates the Kalispell Fire Department’s response area for fires (in red). Due to
annexation of unincorporated county areas into the city there are areas that are part of the city
that are not contiguous to it or are connected by just the center line of the highway. The
challenges of operating with limited staffing levels have prompted the creation of a robust
automatic and mutual aid response system that includes several other communities surrounding
the City of Kalispell. Surrounding communities that provide automatic or mutual aid into the city,
when necessary, include Evergreen (dark yellow), Smith Valley (light yellow), South Kalispell
(orange), and West Valley (light gray). The black pin dots indicate the location of fire stations.
17
FIGURE 2-8: Kalispell Fire Department Response Area (in Red)
Administrative and Programmatic Staffing Review
The organizational structure of any organization or entity, whether public or private, establishes
and illustrates the important hierarchical relationships between various people, supervisors/
subordinates, levels, divisions, and bureaus within the organization that allow it to function
properly, operate effectively and efficiently in its daily operations, or the pursuit of its mission. It
also helps to clearly define the organizational chain of command from top to bottom, an
especially important consideration in a quasi-military public safety organization such as the fire
department where everyone from the highest rank to the lowest is subject to receiving orders,
and, except for the lowest rank also issues them. Effective communications in any organization,
but especially public safety agencies, are essential and a cohesive chain of command allows
everyone to know exactly who they report to, and/or who reports to them.
18
When discussing the organizational structure of fire departments, the normal perspective is to
focus on the operational aspects of the department. However, in order for a fire department to
be able to perform its key mission(s)—response to and mitigation of a wide range of emergency
incidents—there needs to be a sufficient support system in place. The size and complexity of this
support system should be dictated by the size and complexity of the community and its fire
department.
Fire Administration is the administrative and management branch of the department where the
day-to-day operations of the department are coordinated and managed. This includes fiscal
(including billing for EMS transports), human resources, planning, records management, fire
prevention, training, and intergovernmental liaison functions.
The organizational structure of the Kalispell Fire Department is currently limited, which is not
unusual in smaller departments. As currently configured, the KFD is headed by a Fire Chief who is
the department’s highest-ranking officer and serves as the administrative and operational head
of the department. The chief is appointed by the City Manager. The Chief appears to be an
effective advocate for the organization, and who is trying to bring the department to a higher
level of service and effectiveness. He works a straight day work schedule, Monday through
Friday.
The Chief is assisted by an Assistant Fire Chief who also works a daytime schedule and serves as
the second in command of the department. The Assistant Chief serves as both the Department’s
Operations Chief and Training Officer and assumes the Chief’s duties in his absence. Both the
Chief and the Assistant Chief are considered management and are not a part of the collective
bargaining unit. As a management team, they share responsibilities for confidential personnel
matters, supervision, handling grievances or potential grievances, administering the collective
bargaining agreement, overseeing budgetary expenditures, assisting with the development of
policies and procedures, and the myriad of administrative and management tasks that are
associated with running a significant sized, modern, full-service emergency services provider.
They also appear to form a capable, well respected, and effective command team. Overall,
the department appears to work diligently to meet the needs of the community. The City of
Kalispell is to be commended for supporting this strong management team, which is guiding the
department forward.
The modern fire chief (and in the case of the KFD, the Assistant Chief also) is not only a leader,
providing vision for the department’s direction, they also oversee all administrative,
management, and emergency incident operations and roles with the department. They are also
expected to work effectively with other city leadership and department heads, members of the
public, and others to create a safer community. The KFD’s chief officers perform a wide variety
of leadership, technical, administrative, management, and supervisory work in planning,
organizing, directing, and implementing fire prevention, fire suppression, and emergency
medical services operations to prevent or minimize the loss of life and property by fire and
emergency medical conditions. Highly successful contemporary chief officers manage things
and lead people.
19
FIGURE 2-9: Contemporary Chief Officer Roles
The chief officer’s job is dynamic. The chiefs are responsible for carrying out the day-to-day tasks
of running a firefighting organization. Their main responsibilities largely depend upon the size of
the fire department. Such tasks include supervising other officers and firefighters at an
emergency scene and recruiting, training, and equipping them for their respective duties. In
smaller departments such as Kalispell, the chiefs are often more hands-on and must take on
multiple tasks and responsibilities themselves or do without certain programs. Regardless of size
of the department, the chief officer typically has two core duties:
■ Lead and manage day-to-day operations and ensure their department is fully operationally
prepared for its core mission(s).
■ Ensure the most possible successful outcome to emergency incidents they are called upon to
mitigate.
§ § §
Contemporary Chief Fire Officer
Leaderhip
People-oriented
Doing the right things
Inspirational and visionary
Listens and empowers
Leads through others
Pull approach
Management
Task-oriented
Doing things right
Rational thinking
Instructs people
Manages things
Push approach
20
FIGURE 2-10: Forces Impacting the 21ST Century Fire and Emergency Services
Depending upon local needs and organization,
the chief may also be involved in fire
prevention, fire inspection, disaster
preparedness, emergency medical services,
and related disciplines, as well as administrative
duties such as budgets and personnel issues,
research into safety and regulations, and liaison
with other agencies. While many of the fire
chief’s duties and responsibilities are similar to
those of their predecessors, the issues today are
much different, more complex, and ever-
evolving. These new challenges often take the
chiefs into unfamiliar territory as they try to
navigate the changing dynamics of the world
and their department.
The KFD has a single Administrative Assistant
who provides a wide range of support to the Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, and the department
as whole. Included in her portfolio is handling EMS third-party billing, which is itself a time-
consuming endeavor.
Officers and various members of the department have assumed responsibility for ancillary duties
to assist with the management, oversight, and/or coordination of activities or program areas.
These are in addition to their normal emergency response duties. Many of these duties,
particularly those that involve training or program coordination, require additional training
and/or certifications. These ancillary duties include:
■ Radios/repair/communications.
■ EMS Coordinator (refresher, QA, 222’s, EMS committee meeting).
■ Ice rescue.
■ Hazmat team leader.
■ Confined space team leader.
■ SCBA maintenance and air compressor.
■ SCBA annual FIT testing.
■ EMS cot repair and maintenance.
■ Quartermaster.
■ Life Pak AED problems and maintenance.
■ CISM.
■ Gas monitor calibration.
■ Car seat technicians.
■ Mass shooter training and equipment issues.
■ Station 62 housekeeper.
21
■ Station 61 housekeeper.
■ Peer support.
■ EVOC trainer.
■ FSTS proctor for apparatus training.
■ Field Training Officers (3).
■ Small engine maintenance and repair.
■ Prevention.
■ Hand tools/wildland.
■ Quarterly training.
Some of the personnel who fill these positions receive stipends to perform them. The stipends
range from 2 percent to 5 percent of Firefighter I base pay.
Overall, the CPSM project team was very impressed with the management of the KFD. The city
and the department both appear to have more than adequate administrative and financial
procedures and processes in place regarding the management and day-to-day operations of
their respective functions. Information that was requested by the project team was received
from all entities in a timely manner, and generally provided the necessary data and statistics.
During interviews with various stakeholders within the KFD there was a general sense that the
department’s current organizational structure, which has been in place for a number of years, is
no longer robust enough to keep up with the challenges the department is facing with the
current and forecasted levels of development that the city is experiencing. Most communities,
even those where growth is flat, are experiencing increased requests for services. These requests
are amplified in communities with significant growth, or that host (or are in close proximity to)
major tourist destinations. As the number of 911 calls increases, personnel who have been
performing important administrative or support duties that are ancillary to their primary
emergency response duties find they have less and less time to accomplish them. Over time
these duties begin to suffer from neglect, which can negatively impact overall department
operations.
Throughout this report, CPSM will make a number of strategic recommendations regarding the
department’s organizational structure and staffing. It is important to stress that these
recommendations primarily focus on the level of resources and staffing provided, which CPSM
believes will be necessary for the department to continue to keep up the high service level
expectations of a growing community. To that end, as the City of Kalispell continues to grow
and develop, KFD will also need to grow and evolve to keep pace with the increased numbers
and diversity of the calls for service. This includes the long-term need to expand the
department’s administrative and operational support staffing and functions. The City of Kalispell
should evaluate the organizational structure of the KFD in an ongoing manner to ensure that it
meets the needs of the community it services, the expectations of the community, and the
department itself.
Two areas where CPSM believes that the department will need to enhance its administrative
staffing to meet the needs of the department with full-time positions dedicated to these
programs are EMS Coordinator and Training/Safety Officer.
22
The EMS component of the emergency services delivery system is more heavily regulated than
the fire side. In addition to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710, Standard for the
Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations,
and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments (2020 edition), NFPA 450
Guidelines for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Systems, (2009 edition), provides a
template for local stakeholders to evaluate an EMS system and to make improvements based
on that evaluation. The Commission on Accreditation of Ambulance Services (CAAS)10 also
establishes benchmarks for EMS operations, however, its focus is primarily on ambulance
response times, which is not a component of this analysis. Montana regulates EMS agencies, and
certain federal Medicare regulations are also applicable.
The current part-time position of EMS Coordinator is held by one of the captains who receives a
5 percent stipend to perform these duties. This position should evolve into a full-time position. The
EMS Officer or coordinator will handle the day-to-day oversight of the department’s EMS
functions including QA, personnel training and certification, infection control, managing
inventory and drugs, attending meetings, and serving on various state EMS committees. CPSM
believes making this operational change will result in more effective and efficient emergency
medical service delivery by the department.
It is our view that this position would be best designated as a Captain’s position within the KFD,
reporting directly to the Assistant Fire Chief. Doing this would help to emphasis the importance of
the department’s EMS mission, allow the EMS Coordinator to have an equal peer relationship
with the other Captains, and allow for the implementation of more department-wide continuity
of EMS operations. The EMS Officer will work a daytime schedule, which would also provide an
additional member available for response during the day.
Mobile Integrated Health Care and Community Paramedic (MIH/CP) is a concept that will be
developed later in the section of this report on EMS Operations. Mobile Integrated Healthcare is
defined by the National Association of EMTs (NAEMT) as “the provision of healthcare using
patient-centered, mobile resources in the out-of-hospital environment.” Although CPSM was
informed this concept has not gained a lot of traction in Montana, this could be another
potential duty for the EMS Officer to undertake.
Because so much depends upon the ability of the emergency responder to effectively deal with
an emergency, education and training must have a prominent position within an emergency
responder’s schedule of activities when on duty and must be an important position in the
department’s priorities. Education and training programs also help to create the character of a
fire service organization. Agencies that place a real emphasis on their training tend to be more
proficient in performing day-to-day duties. The prioritization of training also fosters an image of
professionalism and instills pride in the organization.
The training function in the KFD is currently headed by the Assistant Fire Chief who has been in
her position for about two years. At the time of this assessment the Assistant Chief was the only
person formally assigned to training and she had to split her duties related to training with her
myriad other duties. She was attempting to get the training program back on track after the
COVID-19 pandemic. The Assistant Chief handles most of the scheduling of training and the
maintaining of certifications; however, she does not directly deliver much of the training herself.
Instead, she utilizes the abilities of other department members and brings in outside instructors.
The overall training function is discussed in much greater detail later in this section of the report.
10. The Commission on Accreditation of Ambulance Services (CAAS) is an independent commission that
has established a comprehensive series of standards for the ambulance service industry.
23
It was reported that at one time the KFD had a dedicated training officer before those duties
were combined with the Assistant Chief’s other duties and responsibilities. However, it did
appear that the training program is headed in the right direction. There seems to be a
dedicated effort—and desire by the members of the department, led by the Assistant Chief—to
focus training on a wide array of training activities. However, as the department increases in size
and its missions grow more complex, attempting to manage the wide-ranging training function
along with her diverse and extensive portfolio of other duties will eventually overwhelm the
Assistant Chief. This is not meant to be negative in any way, the reality is that at some point
fatigue will likely set in.
As a result, CPSM believes that within the next several years the two roles should be separated
into two separate positions with the creation of a full-time position of Training and Safety Officer
at the rank of Captain. The Training and Safety Officer would handle all the KFD’s training and
safety functions. The Training and Safety Officer would work a daytime schedule, thus providing
an additional member available for response during the day. They would report directly to the
Assistant Fire Chief.
The training function of the department has no dedicated administrative support staff to handle
training records, recertifications, assist with class scheduling, etc.
As the KFD’s administrative and support functions develop and expand, there will likely be a
need to expand the administrative support to these personnel with the addition of an additional
Administrative Assistant. If, and when, this occurs will be dictated by the need generated if the
recommended positions contained in this report are created/filled.
A Fire and EMS Department Strategic Plan provides encompasses both a baseline gap analysis
of the organization and a “road map” to develop and achieve a planned response to specific
factors which will or potentially will affect the organization’s mission, or in the case of a public
safety agency, service deliverables. A Fire and EMS Strategic or Master Plan identifies the
purpose of an organization, what the organization will do, and how it will perform though goals
and measurable objectives. It specifies baseline capabilities, real or potential constraints that
may exist or be placed on the organization and delivers a set of goals and requirements to
achieve identified objectives and desired outcomes.
Defining clear goals and objectives for any
organization through a formal strategic planning
document establishes a resource that any member
of the organization, or those external to the
organization, can view and determine in what
direction the organization is heading, and as well
how the organization is planning to get there.
In a strategic plan, it is essential that clear and
achievable goals and objectives for each program
area and service deliverable are developed. Each
program area must then (1) define its goals; (2)
translate the goals into measurable indicators of
goal achievement; (3) collect data on the
indicators from those who have utilized the program; and (4) compare the data from program
participants and controls in terms of goal criteria.11 Objectives should be SMART (specific,
11. Starling, Managing the Public Sector, 287.
24
measurable, ambitious/attainable, realistic, and time-bound). Additionally, these goals should
link back to the city’s fiscal planning goals and the council’s strategic goals and initiatives.
Administrative and Programmatic Staffing Recommendations:
■ As a planning objective, the City of Kalispell and KFD should consider the creation of a full-
time position of EMS Coordinator at the rank of Captain. This position should continue to have
the requirement that the person holding it must be a currently certified paramedic and hold
that certification for the duration of their time in the position. (Recommendation No. 1.)
■ As a planning objective, the current position of Assistant Fire Chief should be formally
redefined as Assistant Chief for Operations: Second-in-command of the department
(“executive officer”) responsible for the direct supervision of the Captains, daily operational
activities, personnel management, facilities, apparatus, and equipment. The Fire Chief should
continue to delegate significant management responsibility and authority to the Assistant Fire
Chief. (Recommendation No. 2.)
■ As a planning objective, the City of Kalispell should create a full-time position of Training and
Safety Officer for the KFD, at the rank of Captain, to oversee, coordinate, and conduct all fire
and EMS training for department personnel. The position of Training Officer should be
separated from the Assistant Fire Chief position. The Training and Safety Officer should report
directly to the Assistant Fire Chief. (Recommendation No. 3.)
■ Long-term, if the above positions are created, the City of Kalispell will need to consider the
addition of an additional administrative assistant to the KFD administrative support staff.
(Recommendation No. 4.)
■ CPSM recommends the KFD develop and implement a comprehensive strategic plan that
incorporates measurable and obtainable administrative, operational, fiscal, and
programmatic goals and objectives. CPSM further recommends this strategic planning
document cover the near-, mid-, and long-term, and be updated as appropriate at the end
of the mid-term period. (Recommendation No. 5.)
≈ ≈ ≈
Operational Staffing Review
The KFD currently has an authorized staff of 35 personnel. Of these, 34 are sworn emergency
response personnel, with 32 assigned to primarily fire and EMS operations positions while the
remaining two, the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief, perform a variety of administrative and
support functions. However, both Chiefs are also actively involved in fire and EMS operations as
needed. This is common in smaller departments where personnel often wear multiple hats or
perform multiple functions. The single non-uniformed person is an office Administrative Assistant
position who performs a variety of roles for the department.
It is important to note that the staffing data we will cite are not recommendations, they are
statistics that were compiled from data provided by fire departments. The numbers also do not
differentiate between fire departments that provide primary EMS to their communities as the KFD
does, and those that do not. Departments that do provide EMS generally have much higher call
volume and thus require higher staffing levels.
25
FIGURE 2-11: Kalispell Municipal Boundaries, Urbanized Areas, and KFD Stations
Fire and EMS operations in Kalispell are currently
deployed from two stations. In addition to the
ambulances, E631 is ALS-level and staffed with a
minimum of two paramedics. When Ladder 642 is in
service, it is ALS as well with a minimum of two
paramedics.
The figure to the left illustrates Kalispell’s municipal
boundaries, urbanized areas, and fire station locations.
Each department shift (except D Shift) has a total of 10
personnel assigned, including two Captains, two
Engineers, and six firefighters with an allowance for up
to three off. D Shift, which is between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m. daily, is staffed with two firefighters. One of these
personnel is on duty each day. Of the department’s
operations personnel 24 are certified paramedics (EMT-
P); the remainder are Advanced Emergency Medical
Technicians (AEMTs). CPSM was informed that in 2006
when Station 62 opened, and the city’s population and
call volume were much lower, each shift had 11 personnel.
Prior to the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) there was no minimum staffing
requirement, and a station could be closed. This resulted in times during which just a single
station was open with three personnel on duty. In this case, these personnel staffed an engine at
Station 61; there was no ambulance on duty. Instead, mutual aid was utilized for transport
ambulances.
Through negotiations, the current CBA stipulates a minimum of staffing of five personnel for one
engine company (Station 61) and one ambulance (Station 62). The KFD attempts to maintain
staffing of seven personnel from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for staffing two ambulances; and six from
7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. By contract, up to three personnel can be off on scheduled leave
including vacation, personal, holiday, compensatory time, and Kelly Days.
The accompanying table illustrates the deployment of KFD resources based upon the on-duty
staffing level.
§ § §
26
TABLE 2-2: KFD Staffing Matrix
On-duty Staffing
Level
Station 61
Staffing Unit(S) Staffed Station 62
Staffing Unit(S) Staffed
5 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 2 Ambulance w/ 2
6 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 3
Ladder w/ 3
or
Ambulance w/ 3
7 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 4
Ladder w/ 4
and/or
2 Ambulances w/ 2
8 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 3
Ladder w/ 3
or
Ambulance w/ 3
9 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 4
Ladder w/ 4
and/or
2 Ambulances w/ 2
10 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 5 Ladder w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2
11 Personnel 6 Engine w/ 4
Ambulance w/ 2 5 Ladder w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2
The department delivers field operations and emergency response services through a clearly
defined division of labor that includes first-line operational supervisors (Captains), technical
specific staff (Engineers), and firefighters. Currently, the entire city is considered a single
operational unit. The senior Captain serves as the shift commander.
In Kalispell, except for D Shift personnel, field operations personnel work a three-platoon system
that is comprised of 24-hours on and 48-hours off. In a straight 24-48 schedule personnel work an
average of 56 hours per week. This can trigger the provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA), which stipulates that firefighters whose work schedule averages more than 53 hours
per week must be compensated at 1.5 times their normal rate of pay for any hours worked in
excess of 53. As an example, if firefighters work a 28-day cycle, as they do in Kalispell, those
personnel who work their full schedule during the cycle can work a maximum of 212 hours
before they must be compensated at their overtime rate. Because these personnel would work
224 hours during this cycle, this equates to needing to be compensated for 12 hours of overtime
during that rotation. Since they are already being compensated at straight time for those 12
hours, in reality, the city would need to compensate them at 12 hours of half (0.5) time for those
hours or a total of six hours of additional pay. If the personnel take any time off on leave during
the cycle their hours are reduced, and if they take 12 or more hours off during the cycle, no FLSA
compensation is required.
There are various ways to address the provisions of the FLSA including the use of Kelly Days,
which are days when the member’s shift is scheduled on-duty, but the member is scheduled off,
in order to reduce the average number of hours in the workweek during each cycle. This is a
common practice utilized by many municipalities. It should be noted that Kelly days are in
addition to vacation, personal, sick, and other types of leave each member receives as part of
the benefit package.
In a 28-day cycle, if each member were awarded 12 hours—or one-half a shift—off their
average workweek would be reduced to 53 hours and no FLSA compensation would be
27
required. However, as agreed to in the current collective bargaining agreement between the
City of Kalispell and Local 547 of the International Association of Firefighters, each member of
the bargaining unit, which includes all uniformed personnel except for the Fire Chief and
Assistant Fire Chief, receive a total of 20 Kelly days each year. This reduces each member’s
average workweek to 46.77 hours.
The number of Kelly Days that each member earns increased from 13 in a previous contract,
which was in effect from July 1, 2016, until June 30, 2019, to the current number in the CBA. The
awarding of 13 Kelly Days is fairly common in the fire service and equates to one 24-hour Kelly
Day each 28-day cycle (13 per year) and reduces the average weekly hours to around 50 hours.
Some facts to consider regarding the number of Kelly Days awarded annually:
■ The number of Kelly Days now is an increase of 7 days from the 13 given in the contracts prior
to 2016. Thirteen days is a common number awarded.
■ The current 20 Kelly Days as opposed to the previous 13 equates to an additional 203 shifts per
year that personnel can take off, which directly impacts staffing. This will become a bigger
challenge as the city continues to grow and the department’s staffing needs increase.
■ The 30 personnel on shift accrue a total of 600 24-hour Kelly Day shifts that must be covered,
which also directly impacts staffing.
■ The current number of Kelly Days for each member equates to 16.7 percent of each shift’s
total workdays in the year.
As CPSM mentioned in our 2018 study of the KFD, the number of Kelly Days awarded, and as a
result, the total amount of time off for personnel in the most recent CBA will impact the KFD’s
ability to staff its stations and units at levels that will be recommended in Section 5 of this report.
The larger the department grows, the more the leave situation will impact on the department’s
ability to staff without the excessive use of overtime.
The next figure illustrates the number of days the KFD was at each average staffing level of
between five personnel (as specified in the CBA) and ten personnel between January 1, 2022,
and December 31, 2022. Since staffing levels often fluctuate at various times throughout each
24-hour shift, the average on-duty staffing for the entire day was utilized.
The department averaged seven personnel on duty 40.6 percent of the time during this time
period, followed by 7.5 personnel 22.7 percent of the time. So overall, 63.3 percent of the time
KFD had seven or 7.5 personnel working. Conversely, there were 10 days the department worked
with just five personnel, and another five where the average was 5.5. There were only two days
when 10 or more personnel were on duty and none where staffing was at 11, as it could be with
D shift also on duty.
§ § §
28
FIGURE 2-12: Average Number of Personnel on Duty Each Day, January 1, 2022
to December 31, 2022
Another factor that comes into play regarding recommended staffing levels, the amount of
leave earned, etc., is the amount of overtime needed to maintain the specified minimum
staffing levels of personnel on duty. For the period of January 1, 2022, through December 31,
2022, the KFD utilized 3,099.25 hours of overtime, of which 2,573.75 hours (83 percent) involved
call-back to maintain staffing levels. This equates to an average of 49.5 hours per week, or
slightly more than two full 24-hour shifts. The following figure breaks down the overtime by type.
FIGURE 2-13: KFD Overtime by Type, January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022
Note: Holdovers cover late (near shift change) calls, report completion, etc.
10 DAYS
2.7%5 DAYS
1.4%
32 DAYS
8.8%
34 DAYS
9.3%
148 DAYS,
40.6%
83 DAYS, 22.7%
27 DAYS,
7.4%14 DAYS,
3.8%
3 DAYS,
0.8%
3 DAYS, 0.8 %
5 PERSONNEL
5.5 PERSONNEL
6 PERSONNEL
6.5 PERSONNEL
7 PERSONNEL
7.5 PERSONNEL
8 PERSONNEL
8.5 PERSONNEL
9 PERSONNEL
9.5 PERSONNEL
2,573.75 HOURS
83%
477.5 HOURS
15%
48 HOURS
2%
CALLBACK TO MAINTAIN STAFFING
HOLD OVERS
CALL BACK GENERAL ALARM FIRE
29
Looking ahead, and as will be discussed in greater detail in Section 5, the KFD will need to
gradually increase both overall department and on-duty staffing levels to keep up with the city’s
growth and rising call volume.
Municipalities and fire departments utilize a wide range of practices to maintain their
designated minimum staffing levels. These include both overall on-duty shift staffing and
specifying minimum apparatus staffing. Many municipalities staff more personnel on each shift
than are needed in order to account for personnel on leave. Kalispell does this with the
stipulation in the contract that three personnel on each 10-person shift can be off on scheduled
leave, bringing staffing down to seven. The CBA stipulates a minimum staffing of five, which
suggests that another two personnel could be off on other types of leave. However, at that
point, 50 percent of the on-duty shift would be on leave.
At the opposite end of the spectrum is municipalities that maintain constant staffing, which is
when the designated shift staffing is also the minimum staffing level. Under this system any time
anyone is off on any type of leave, another member on overtime must be brought in to fill that
vacancy.
The best system is probably a combination of both as each municipality generally knows where
the tipping point is when it is less expensive to hire additional personnel rather than continuing to
pay overtime to fill vacancies. Conversely, if a department’s use of overtime is low, it is often less
expensive to pay the overtime rather than hire additional personnel with the associated benefit
costs.
During our field visit to Kalispell, CPSM was informed that time off is very important to the
members of the KFD so they can take advantage of the many activities the area has to offer.
That is understandable; however, even under a straight 24-48 shift schedule personnel work
about 10 days a month, leaving 20 days off. There are many variations of the three platoon,
24-hour shift that provide a larger number of consecutive days off. A couple of these include:
■ 24 on – 24 off – 24 on – 24 off – 24 on – 96 off.
■ 24 on – 24 off – 24 on – 48 off – 24 on – 24 off - 24 on – 120 off.
A somewhat new shift concept involves a four-platoon work schedule (which requires more
personnel) which in its simplest form involves a 24 on / 72 off schedule. This equates to a 42-hour
workweek. The twist with the new concept is that personnel are required to work one “debit”
day each month. In other words, they must work one of their normally scheduled days off each
month with no extra pay. This reduces the number of personnel required to be assigned
permanently to each shift with the additional staffing provided by personnel working debit days.
This schedule averages out to about a 48.6-hour work week.
General Staffing Recommendation:
■ The City of Kalispell should review the current staffing model and collective bargaining
agreement while simultaneously exploring other staffing and shift schedule models/options to
seek alternatives to the current allotment of 20 Kelly Days. The goal of this review is to be able
to work toward increasing daily on-duty staffing levels. (Recommendation No. 6.)
≈ ≈ ≈
30
ORGANIZATIONAL GUIDELINES AND POLICIES
Effective communications systems are key to the successful operation of any emergency
services organization. Standard operating guidelines (SOGs) and standard operating procedures
(SOPs) are mission critical components of fire department daily operations and contribute to
consistent, effective, and safe operations. Without them there is a tendency to “freelance” and
personnel may not all be on the “same page” regarding a wide range of emergency and
administrative operations.
A well written and up-to-date written communications system including a manual of operations
—the playbook if you will—can describe what to do and what not to do. Standard operating
guidelines and procedures in their simplest form are very much a “how-to” guideline for
firefighters to follow to achieve a desired goal. Standard operating guidelines and procedures
are formal documents that specify a firefighter’s course of action thereby ensuring efficiency,
predictability, consistency, and safety.
The fire service faces a dizzying array of challenges and must adapt to many things, including
expanding missions, increasing legal and regulatory requirements, increasing complexity in
emergency response techniques and equipment, and much more. The increasing acceptance
of electric vehicles (EVs) is an example of the fire service needing to learn an all-new
technology, retool, and develop comprehensive policies, procedures, and guidelines on an
array of issues from new ways to provide patient extrication to extinguishing complex battery
fires.
Generally speaking, policies are set and/or issued by the governmental authority having
jurisdiction, in this case the City of Kalispell. Fire department rules, regulations, and policies should
work in tandem with and be consistent with the overarching ordinances, rules, regulations, and
policies that have been adopted by the City of Kalispell. For example, policies concerning such
topics as non-discrimination, sexual harassment, purchasing, freedom of information, internet,
and computer usage (including social media), and smoking (on city premises or in municipal
vehicles) are typically applied across-the-board to all departments and employees. While the
city should provide training and familiarization concerning these policies on a regular basis (an
annual review is usually adequate, with appropriate documentation), employees are obligated
to be familiar with and comply with each policy. Individual departments have either Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) or Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs), which, among other
things, can be used to implement policy at the department level and establish operational
procedures that guide day-to-day activities.
The use of rules and regulations, operational procedures, and various other forms of written
communications are vital parts of a fire department’s overall operations. Rules and regulations
establish expected levels of conduct and general obligations of department members, identify
prohibited activities, and provide for the good order and discipline necessary for the credible
operation of a quasi-military emergency services organization. KFD does not have stand-alone
rules and regulations.
Operational procedures ensure the consistent, effective, efficient, and safe operation of various
aspects of the department’s operations, both emergency and routine. One of many common
denominators among the best fire departments across the United States is that they have a
comprehensive and up-to-date operational procedural manual, and their personnel are well
versed and well-trained in those procedures. The inclusion of written documents, such as training
and safety bulletins, serves to make the system more effective.
31
Standard Operating Procedures/Guidelines (SOPs/SOGs) document how operational tasks
should be accomplished. In essence, they provide personal guidance relative to how to
accomplish operational activities safely and consistently. To be effective, SOPs should be
developed by each department through a participative process. Once developed, personnel
need to be trained on the SOPs and periodically refreshed as to their content.
Standard Operating Procedures/Guidelines are developed for specific instances and based on
the operations, training, resources, services delivered, and the administrative needs of a fire
department. These written policies and internal regulations are typically based on recognized
standards, regulations, and local government rules. These are the procedures that personnel rely
on to perform their duties effectively and safely, and which the department utilizes to establish
administrative processes and oversight.
Over the past 20 years or more, many agencies have shifted from Standard Operating
Procedures (SOGs) to Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs) or a combination of both. Some
experts feel that the term “procedures” implies relatively inflexible task steps or instructions, while
“guidelines” implies more discretion in performing the job. Since emergency incidents are
unpredictable and flexibility is essential, these experts advise fire departments to develop SOGs,
thereby reducing the need to identify exceptions, and perhaps even limiting liability due to
actions by personnel. Other experts believe the opposite is true: the term “guidelines” implies too
much flexibility and discretion, thus reducing control and increasing the likelihood of mistakes.12
Whether agencies use SOGs, SOPs, or a blend of both, well-written SOGs/SOPs are essential in
fire service operations. The following table illustrates the differences between SOGs and SOPs.
TABLE 2-3: The Difference Between SOGs and SOPs
Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs) Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
SOGs tend to have more leeway or room for
interpretations.
SOGs are often an action proceeded by the
word "may" or “should,” which can imply
greater flexibility.
SOPs tend to be more rigid, more of a rule,
and not flexible.
SOPs are often an action preceded by the
word "shall" or “will,” which is
more definitive.
According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), a standard operating procedure
(SOP) is “an organizational directive that establishes a standard course of action.” In other words,
SOPs are written guidelines that explain what is expected and required of fire service personnel
in performing their jobs. Standard operating procedures clearly spell out what is expected and
required of personnel during emergency response and non-emergency activities. They provide
a mechanism to communicate legal and administrative requirements, organizational policies,
and strategic plans to the members. Both fire department SOPs/SOGs and policies are official
documents that provide instruction, methods, procedures, and requirements for how to
operationalize things like bylaws, ordinances, plans, strategies, mutual aid agreements, and
more. Both SOPs and SOGs provide a common set of standards by which every team member
must follow. From the perspective of this discussion, the terms procedure and guideline can be
used interchangeably, but should be applied consistently throughout the system.
Fire departments face an array of constant challenges and must adapt to many things including
expanding missions, increasing legal and regulatory requirements, increasing complexity in
emergency response techniques and equipment, and much more. For those reasons,
12. Developing Effective Standard Operating Procedures for Fire and EMS (FEMA publication)
32
procedures specific to fire department operations are more commonly found in a fire
department SOP/SOG manual. The increasing acceptance of electric vehicles (EVs) is an
example of the fire service needing to learn an all-new technology, retool, and develop
comprehensive procedures and guidelines on an array of issues from new ways to provide
patient extrication to extinguishing complex battery fires. The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)
is another example where response procedures and use of personal protective clothing had to
change. These examples are what CPSM finds important to cover in specific fire department
SOPs/SOGs.
CPSM was initially provided with two sets of documents that were the same ones that were
provided in connection with our 2018 study of the KFD. One of these documents was listed as
the Fire Department Policy Manual, which consisted of a total of 10 documents. The second set
was listed as the SOG Manual, which contained 40 documents. The terms policy and procedure
appear to be considered to be the same and are used interchangeably in the documents. The
study team was provided with, and reviewed, these documents that we believe are the extent
of that system.
To begin with, referring to one of these sets of documents as the Policy Manual can confuse it
with the city policy manual. That term should be reserved for the city’s manual, which should be
applicable to all city employees. If there is a need to clarify how provisions of the city manual
and/or collective bargaining agreement are implemented within the fire department, this can
be accomplished through the development of appropriate SOPs/SOGs or by issuing a General
or Special Order (discussed below).
Working on the confirmation that these documents comprised the extent of the department’s
recent written communications system, we find the system as it has existed is seriously deficient
for providing the wide-ranging guidance and direction necessary for operations involving a
twenty-first century fire and EMS provider. Many of the limited KFD policies and procedures that
CPSM reviewed may be out of date, or their age could not be determined because they did
not indicate either an issue date or most recent review and/or revision date. They also did not
utilize a standard format or contain the approval signature of the Fire Chief at the time of issue.
Although very important procedures such as for Maydays and rapid intervention team (RIT)
operations were created recently, many other important ones were missing. There were no
operational procedures/guidelines in place to deal with mission critical operations such as
Structure Fires, Basic Engine Company and/or Truck Company Operations, Vehicle Extrication
Operations, or Thermal Imaging Camera and Automatic External Defibrillator Use to name just a
few. These are the types of operational procedures/guidelines that are most important and
provide standardization and consistency of operations. On the administrative side, CPSM was
not provided with policies or procedures that might cover topics such as meal and rest periods,
shift coverage procedures when vacancies occur, incident reports, etc.
The lack of an effective system of standard operating procedures/guidelines (SOPs/SOGs) can
have an adverse impact on many different facets of the day-to-day operations of the
department that can result in a lack of consistency during operations, freelancing, unsafe
actions, loss of accountability and discipline, poor performance of individuals and operational
crews, and increased risk to firefighters and citizens.
During our field visit and our review of pertinent documentation provided by the department,
and, in interviews with the department’s internal stakeholders, CPSM was informed by the Chief
that the Assistant Fire Chief has been working on a priority project (among her many other
duties) to update—probably more realistically create a new—comprehensive standard
operating procedures manual. Like many agencies starting this process basically from scratch,
33
the work ahead will take an extended time (most likely several years) to complete, even if the
Chief dedicates a certain number of hours each week to the project.
The CPSM team was provided with the following lists of SOPs that have already been
developed, and those that are in the development pipeline. The first list includes “Policies.” The
second list is for SOGs.
Policies
■ 100 Series-Administration
■ 101 Policy Review
■ 102 Chain of Command
■ 103 Uniforms
■ 104 Shift Vacancy/Transfer
■ 105 Light Duty Policy
■ 106 Documentation and Reports
■ 107 Annual Fitness Evaluations (needs
revision)
■ 108 Annual Physicals
■ 109 Cell Phones
■ 110 Safety Concerns
■ 110 Attachment A: Safety Concern Form
■ 111 Grooming Standards
■ 112 Citizen complaint
■ 113 Shift Trade Policy
■ 114 Promotional Process
■ 115 Comp Time
■ 116 Annual Leave Selection
■ 117 Paid Time Off
■ 118 Illness/Injury/Exposure (Attachment)
■ 118 Attachment A: Exposure
Determination Guide
■ 119 D shift
■ 120 Scheduling
■ 121 Chaplaincy Program (in legal)
■ 122 Specialty Teams
■ 123 Compensation for Training
■ 124 Ride-along Policy
■ 124 Attachment A: Ride-along Waiver
■ 200 Series-Fire Operation Policies
■ 201 Company Officer Step Program
■ 201 Attachment A-Approved Leadership
Courses
■ 201 Attachment B: Check-off list
■ 202 Gross Decontamination (formerly
known as Carcinogen Exposure
Reduction)
■ 203 Requesting a Fire Investigator
(formerly SOG 221)
■ 204 NFIRS Codes
■ 300 Series-Emergency Medical Policies
■ 301 Medication Control
■ 302 Medical Care Scope of Practice
■ 303 Biological Decontamination
■ 304 Refusal
34
SOGs - Completed
■ SOG INDEX-Completed
■ SOG 114 Acting Out of Class
■ SOG 115 Scheduling
■ SOG 205 Response Guidelines
■ SOG 501 Peer Support Program
■ SOG 502 Critical Incident Stress
Management
SOGs – Revision Needed
■ 201 Shift Change
■ 202 Daily Equipment Checks
■ 203 Daily Schedule
■ 204 Staffing
■ 206 Unit Designation
■ 207 Radio Communications
■ 208 PPE 209 Apparatus Operation
■ 210 Command
■ 211 Fire Alarm Response
■ 212 Carbon Monoxide Response
■ 213 Responses with Suspected Violence
■ 214 Gas Leak Response
■ 215 Mayday Procedures
■ 216 Electrical Hazards
■ 217 IRIC
■ 218 MDT Use
■ 219 SCBA Inspection
■ 220 SCBA Use
■ 223 Assigned Vehicles
■ 224 Cancelling resources
■ 225 Fire Attack
■ 226 Call-Back
■ 401 Hazardous Materials Response
■ 402 Ice Rescue
■ 403 Swiftwater Rescue
■ 404 Tech Rescue
35
CPSM reviewed a sampling of the recently developed procedures and found them to be well-
written, thorough, and consistent with current industry best practices regarding emergency
services operations. The KFD is now using a standardized template similar to the ones used by
many other fire departments. The template includes the title of the procedure, the issue or
revision date, the number, the category, the number of pages, and approval by a chief officer.
However, we noted that they still refer to “Policy” in one set of documents and “SOGs” in
another. In order to not be confused with city policies, we would recommend this be changed
to either “Procedure” or “Guideline” for all documents and they be combined into a single
manual with appropriate sections.
The challenge for Kalispell, as with many fire departments, will be to secure organizational buy-in
relative to these procedures. The Chief is attempting to do that with the current process. Once
the Assistant Chief completes a draft of a new SOP, she distributes it throughout the department
(and if necessary, forwards it to the city legal department for review). Personnel have two weeks
to submit comments on the draft. Where appropriate, revisions are made based upon the
comments received. The SOP is then finalized and issued. The Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief
are to be commended for this process, which CPSM considers to be a Best Practice.
Fire rescue personnel provide a valuable technical resource in the development of SOPs/SOGs.
For the most part, the development and drafting of these procedures should not be a top-down,
management-driven process. The personnel who are going to be required to adhere to and
follow the procedures should have input into their development. Input from personnel at all
levels will continue to strengthen the quality and effectiveness of SOPs/SOGs.
Once an SOP/SOG has been developed, it should be presented to department personnel, and
then periodically reviewed to ensure that these practices are implemented on the incident
scene. Moving forward, the Chief plans to establish a committee comprised of a cross-section of
department members of all ranks to regularly review the current SOPs/SOGs to ensure that they
reflect the organization’s current operations. They will then be revised again as necessary and
appropriate. If implemented, the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief should be commended for
this process, which CPSM will consider to be a Best Practice. In addition, one SOP/SOG and one
policy should be reviewed by a randomly selected member at each shift change briefing and
training session. Once personnel get used to this expectation, the knowledge and respect for
SOPs/SOGs will grow within the organization and become an accepted part of the
Department’s culture.
CPSM encourages fire departments to draw upon the policies, practices, and procedures of
other organizations, both local and distant. The experiences and lessons learned from other fire
and rescue agencies can be extremely helpful in the development of SOPs/SOGs. There are
numerous excellent SOP/SOG manuals on-line that can assist with the development of
necessary procedures. No emergency services provider should be expected to write a policy
document from scratch or without a template. In addition, the KFD may want to consider, when
applicable, a reference listing of applicable fire service industry standards and benchmarks and
even city policy. By doing this, members gain a better understanding of the SOG and can
research references for additional learning opportunities.
As part of its revamping of its written communications system, the KFD should institute a process
for issuing General or Special Orders, which are directives and/or special instructions that cover
various facets of department operations but can be quickly issued as needed. They may cover
a particular period of time regarding a special situation or may provide a temporary procedure
pending development and issue of a full operational procedure.
36
Also included in the system should be Training Bulletins that would be issued to serve as
reference with regard to tested and approved methods of performing tasks; Safety Bulletins,
which are issued to serve as references with regard to general and specific safety and health
issues; and Informational Bulletins or memorandums that are published for the general
knowledge of recipients such as temporary street closures, hydrants out of service, community
events, etc. A numbering system should be implemented to keep track of these documents for
indexing and future reference purposes.
Organizational Policies and Guidelines Recommendations:
■ Rules and regulations establish expected levels of conduct and general obligations of
department members, identify prohibited activities, and provide for the good order and
discipline necessary for the credible operation of a quasi-military emergency services
organization. The KFD should form a management-labor committee to develop a
comprehensive rules and regulations document that identifies anticipated, acceptable/
permitted, and prohibited behaviors. This document should be distributed to and signed by
each member of the department. It will also provide important guidance to new employees.
(Recommendation No. 7.)
Suggested sections for the rules and regulations include, but are not limited to:
□ A preamble.
□ Department vision statement and mission statement.
□ Purpose of the rules and regulations.
□ Organization.
□ Membership requirements.
□ General rules of conduct.
□ Officer qualifications and selection (may just reference current department procedure, CBA
language, and/or civil service language).
□ Officer duties and responsibilities.
□ Chain of command.
□ Uniforms and grooming.
□ Discipline.
□ Other areas that may be agreed upon for inclusion.
■ The KFD should continue to make the revamping of the department’s policies, procedures,
and guidelines a high priority. In addition to the documents already completed and/or in
development, attention should be given to mission-critical procedures such as, but not limited
to, basic engine company and truck company operations, dwelling fires, commercial
structures, mid-rise buildings, industrial incidents, personnel accountability, hazardous materials
incidents, vehicle extrication operations, thermal imaging camera and automatic external
defibrillator use, and mass-casualty incidents. The addition of numerous other procedures
covering additional operational, routine administrative, and training procedures should then
follow. (Recommendation No. 8.)
■ In order for its materials to not be confused with city policies, the KFD should consider not
utilizing the term “policy” in its documents. This should be changed to either “Procedure” or
37
“Guideline” for all documents. AS well, all documents should be combined into a single
manual with appropriate sections. (Recommendation No. 9.)
■ The general format and organization of the SOP/SOG manual is a very important
consideration and the department must ensure that the manual/system is easy to utilize, with
cross-referencing of the necessary procedures. If personnel are going to be required to learn
and adhere to the department’s procedures, then the format, organization, and filing of them
must be user-friendly, otherwise they will sit on a shelf, or on a computer drive, unused.
(Recommendation No. 10.)
□ The first operational procedure should identify and explain the components of the Written
Communications System, including the use and organization of the SOG Manual and other
components of the system such as standardized forms. This procedure should also contain a
provision that the entire SOG Manual will be reviewed on at least an annual basis and that
updates and revisions can/will be made at any time, as necessary.
■ The KFD is strongly encouraged to carry through with the plan to establish a committee to
review and assist with revisions to the SOG manual in the future. The committee should be
comprised of members of each rank and include specific representation by a senior officer of
the collective bargaining unit. (Recommendation No. 11.)
■ The KFD should institute a process for issuing General Orders, Training Bulletins, Safety Bulletins,
and Informational Bulletins. A numbering system should be implemented to keep track of
these documents for indexing and future reference purposes. (Recommendation No. 12.)
≈ ≈ ≈
COMMUNITY RISK REDUCTION
Community risk reduction activities are important undertakings of a modern-day fire
department. A comprehensive fire protection system in every jurisdiction should include, at a
minimum, the key functions of fire prevention, code enforcement, inspections, and public
education. Preventing fires before they occur, and limiting the impact of those that do, should
be priority objectives of every fire department. Fire investigation is a mission-important function
of fire departments, as this function serves to determine how a fire started and why the fire
behaved the way it did, providing information that plays a significant role in fire prevention
efforts. Educating the public about fire safety and teaching them appropriate behaviors on how
to react should they be confronted with a fire is also an important life-safety responsibility of the
fire department.
Fire suppression and response, although necessary to protect property, have minor impact on
preventing fires. Rather, it is public fire education, fire prevention, and built-in fire protection
systems that are essential elements in protecting citizens from death and injury due to fire, smoke
inhalation, and carbon monoxide poisoning. The fire prevention mission is of utmost importance,
as it is the only area of service delivery that dedicates 100 percent of its effort to the reduction of
the incidence of fire.
Fire prevention is a key responsibility of every member of the fire department, and fire prevention
activities should include all personnel. On-duty personnel can be assigned with the responsibility
for “in-service” inspections to identify and mitigate fire hazards in buildings, to familiarize
firefighters with the layout of buildings, identify risks that may be encountered during firefighting
operations, and to develop pre-fire plans, such as the KFD does currently. On-duty personnel in
many departments are also assigned responsibility for permit inspections and public fire safety
education activities.
38
Fire prevention should be approached in a truly systematic manner, and many community
stakeholders have a personal stake and/or responsibility in these endeavors. A significant
percentage of all the requirements found in building/construction and associated codes are
related in some way to fire protection and safety. Various activities such as plan reviews, permits,
and inspections are often spread among different departments in the municipal government
and are often not coordinated as effectively as they should be. Every effort should be made to
ensure these activities are managed effectively between departments.
The community risk reduction (CRR) function in the KFD is commanded by the Fire Chief, who
also holds the title of Fire Marshal. Under Kalispell’s current organizational structure his roles and
responsibilities (as well as the fire department’s) are more limited than in many comparably sized
jurisdictions. Most of the code-related functions in Kalispell are handled by the Planning, Building,
and Community Development Department (PBCD). While the KFD previously had a full-service
Bureau of Fire Prevention, at some point in the past it was disbanded for financial reasons and
the majority of its duties transferred to the PBCD.
PBCD has a wide-ranging portfolio of duties and responsibilities. It is responsible for administering
the various codes, performing inspections, development, and new construction plan reviews,
witnessing fire prevention system tests, and ensuring code compliance through inspections
regarding new buildings while under construction. The Fire Chief/Marshal works closely with the
PBCD concerning matters of new development plan and site reviews.
PBCD has a staff of nine personnel including building inspectors, fire inspectors, and a fire plans
examiner. Four of the department’s staff are certified as International Codes Council (ICC) fire
inspectors.
At the time of this assessment the State of Montana was utilizing:
■ 2021 International Fire Code for new construction.
The City of Kalispell has adopted:
■ 2021 International Fire Code (IFC).
■ 2021 International Residential Code (IRC).
■ International Existing Building Code.
■ International Mechanical Code.
■ International Fuel Gas Code.
■ Uniform Plumbing Code.
■ National Electrical Code.
The IFC and IRC are updated every three years.
Under the Administrative Rules of Montana, the building department is responsible for approving
fire protection systems (not the Fire Marshal’s office) and performing these types of plan reviews.
This includes all NFPA 13 and 13R Fire Suppression Systems along with some dry chemical systems
for server rooms, bank vaults etc. and fire alarm system reviews. The following are the plans
reviewed for 2020 through 2022:
■ 2020: 43.
■ 2021: 49.
■ 2022: 61.
39
The Fire Chief/Marshal does participate in final system inspections along with acceptance
testing.
As previously mentioned, fire suppression and response, although necessary to minimize property
damage, have little impact on preventing fires. Rather, public fire education, fire prevention,
and built-in fire protection and notification systems are essential elements in protecting citizens
from death and injury due to fire. Automatic fire sprinklers have proven to be very effective in
reducing fire loss and minimizing fire deaths in residential structures. However, many states,
Montana among them, have been reluctant to impose code provisions that require these
installations in one- and two-family dwellings. The state’s current fire code does not mandate the
installation of these life safety systems, nor does it permit municipalities to adopt local ordinances
that require them.
Automatic sprinklers are highly effective elements of total system design for fire protection in
buildings, including- one, and two-family dwellings. Sprinklers help prevent fires from reaching
flashover in a compartment fire, which is key to reducing fire deaths and injuries. They save lives
and property, producing large reductions in the number of deaths per thousand fires, in average
direct property damage per fire, and especially in the likelihood of a fire with large loss of life or
large property loss. They do so much quicker, and often more effectively and with less damage,
than do firefighters. No fire safety improvement strategy has as much documented life safety
effectiveness as fire sprinklers because they actually extinguish the fire or, at a minimum, hold it
in check and prevent flashover, until the arrival of the fire department.
While built-in fire protection should significantly reduce the spread of fire, it may not completely
extinguish the fire. Firefighters still need to complete the extinguishment and perform ventilation,
overhaul, and salvage operations.
From 2007 to 2011, fires in all types of structures, when sprinklers were present in the fire area of a
fire large enough to activate sprinklers in a building not under construction, the sprinklers
operated 91 percent of the time. When they operated, they were effective 96 percent of the
time, resulting in a combined performance of operating effectively in 87 percent of reported
fires where sprinklers were present in the fire area and the fire was large enough to activate
sprinklers. In homes (including apartments), wet-pipe sprinklers effectively operate 92 percent of
the time. When wet-pipe sprinklers were present in the fire area in homes that were not under
construction, the fire death rate per 1,000 reported structure fires was lower by 82 percent, and
the rate of property damage per reported home structure fire was lower by 68 percent. In all
structures, not just homes, when sprinklers of any type failed to operate, the reason most often
given (64 percent of failures) was shut-off of the system before the fire began.
The following figure provides a typical residential fire timeline.
§ § §
40
FIGURE 2-14: Residential Fire Timeline
According to the NFPA, the average cost nationally for installing automatic fire sprinklers in new,
single-family residential structures is estimated to be $1.61 per square foot.13 For a 2,000 square-
foot home, the estimated cost would be approximately $3,220. This can be less than the cost of
granite countertops or a carpeting upgrade. In addition, many homeowner’s insurance policies
provide a discount for homes equipped with residential fire sprinklers. The State of California has
mandated the installation of residential fire sprinkler systems in all new one- and two-family
dwellings and townhouses statewide since 2010. Currently the state does not require residential
sprinklers in single-family residences.
Under Montana law only schools are required to be inspected on an annual basis, which is done
by PBCD. In addition, the PBCD tries to perform annual inspections on the city’s hotels,
occupancies that have various licensing requirements such as healthcare facilities and daycare
centers, and when there is a liquor license transfer. PBCD has two inspectors who focus primarily
on fire-related issues.
Fire life-safety inspections completed for the past three years:
■ 2020: 201.
■ 2021: 180.
■ 2022: 188.
There are many reasons why existing buildings should be inspected for fire code compliance.
The obvious purpose is to ensure that occupants of the building are living, working, or occupying
a building that is safe for them to do so. Some buildings are required to have specific inspections
conducted based on the type of occupancy and the use of the buildings such as but not
13. NFPA, “Cost of Installing Residential Fire Sprinklers Averages $1.61 per Square Foot” Quincy, MA:
September 11, 2008.
41
limited to healthcare facilities (hospitals, nursing homes, etc.), schools, restaurants, and places of
assembly. These inspections are mandated by various statutes, ordinances, and codes. The
inspections themselves are often limited to specific areas within the building and to specific time
frames. The fire inspectors will also witness tests of required fire protection systems and
equipment. Conversely, many businesses are not required to have any type of periodic fire
safety inspections.
Fire inspections can also identify violations and make follow-up inspections to ensure that
violations are addressed and that the fire code is enforced. In fire prevention, the term
"enforcement" is most often associated with inspectors performing walk-throughs of entire
facilities, looking for any hazards or violations of applicable codes. Educating the owner to the
requirements, as well as the spirit and intent, of the code can also attain positive benefits for fire
and life safety.
With more than 1,000 business located in Kalispell, several of them large, along with numerous
schools, multifamily residential complexes, and other hazards, there is no consistent or
comprehensive program that ensures that all businesses and commercial occupancies receive
a routine “maintenance” fire prevention inspection on a regular periodic basis.
In many departments, on-duty firefighters can be assigned with the responsibility for “in-service”
inspections to identify and mitigate fire hazards in buildings, to identify risks that may be
encountered during firefighting operations, and to develop pre-fire plans (which the KFD already
does). On-duty personnel in many departments are also assigned responsibility for permit
inspections and public fire safety education activities. Fire department personnel are often able
to recognize hazards or violations, whereas inspectors are often able to identify features of a
specific property that could prove important during an emergency. Effective information sharing
enhances the ability of the fire department to protect the community. While KFD personnel
perform some “inspections,” these are primarily for the purpose of developing pre-fire/incident
plans (which are discussed in Section 5) rather than for evaluating code and safety compliance.
Performing complex, technical inspections can be a very time-consuming, but necessary,
endeavor. Nationwide, communities that have proactive fire inspection and code enforcement
programs in place often have a lower incidence of fire loss because many potential fire- and
life-safety hazards are identified and corrected before they cause or contribute to a fire.
Of course, having sufficient personnel to perform fire prevention inspections can be a costly
proposition. To help offset these costs, many jurisdictions are now assessing the application of
registration or inspection fees for businesses. The fees assessed often vary widely by jurisdiction.
New Jersey has enacted a uniform statewide fee structure for different types of businesses with
the annual registration fees for businesses ranging from $108 to $4,781. Fees for various permits
range from $54 to $641. Kern County, Calif., has established a fee schedule that covers a wide
range of permits, inspections, and services such as plans reviews. The fee schedule includes:
■ Operating Permits: $50 to $520.
■ Construction Permits: $35 to $1,000.
■ Fireworks Permit: $325.
■ Plan Review: $130 to $195.
■ Special Inspections: $450 to $520 and $140/hour (minimum two hours).
■ Fire Safety Inspections and Standbys (all two-hour minimum): $140/hour to $455/hour.
■ Administrative Fees: $10 to $1,000.
42
Some jurisdictions also assess a reinspection fee if an inspector must make a return visit to
determine if code violations have been abated. At the time of this assessment, the City of
Kalispell did not have any significant fees for post-occupancy fire prevention and safety
functions and services. In addition, the city cannot use building fees for subsequent life safety
and maintenance inspections.
FIGURE 2-15: Remote Video Inspection (RVI)
One of the newest trends in fire prevention
inspections is the use of Remote Video
Inspection (RVI) programs. According to the
NFPA, “RVI provides an effective alternative
means for building inspection, enabling one
or more parties to remotely perform an
inspection of a building or building
component.” The NFPA has released a new
infographic that emphasizes the five key
considerations for an RVI inspection program:
procedures, communication, technology,
verification, and completion.
According to the NFPA:
“RVI provides an effective alternative means
for building inspection, enabling one or more
parties to remotely perform an inspection of
a building, or building component. Just like
traditional on-site or in person inspections, an
RVI typically occurs as part of a jurisdiction’s permitting or inspection process. Virtual inspections
are not intended to be less complete than an on-site inspection; they are meant to achieve the
same (or enhanced) results as an on-site inspection.”14
Until recently, use of RVI was limited and sporadic. The COVID-19 pandemic and remote work
conditions combined with a normal extensive workload have made more jurisdictions consider
alternatives to traditional inspection procedures and processes. Long term, the use of a program
such as this can help any fire prevention entity better manage often unrealistic inspection
workloads.
The KFD has a very active public fire education program, which is an important component of
an overall fire prevention program, particularly in the residential areas of the city. This effort is
very commendable and results in time and resources well spent. Nearly 75 percent of all fires,
fire deaths, and injuries occur in the home, an area where code enforcement and inspection
programs have little to no jurisdiction. Public education is the area where the fire service will
make the greatest impact on preventing fires and subsequently reducing the accompanying
loss of life, injuries, and property damage through adjusting people’s attitudes and behaviors
with regard to fires and fire safety. Fire prevention presentations include to grade school
students, school station tours and education, drivers ed presentations in high schools, and car
seat safety visits from citizens to stations. These programs are completed mostly by on-duty
14. https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Publications-and-media/Press-Room/News-
releases/2020/New-infographic-from-NFPA-highlights-remote-inspection
Image credit: National Fire Protection Association
43
firefighter crews, though some overtime is used for special events, safety fairs, etc. The number of
public educations completed over the past three years is:
■ 2020: 0.
■ 2021: 11.
■ 2022: 37.
This current program also includes offering home safety inspections along with the distribution
and installation of smoke detectors. The KFD is to be commended for this effort, which CPSM
considers to be a Best Practice.
FIGURE 2-16: KFD Personnel Performing School Presentation
There are numerous ways the KFD can spread its fire safety (and all hazard) messages. These
include, but are certainly not limited to:
■ Maximize KFD public appearances at community events.
■ Add signs or marquees to fire stations with regular fire and life safety messages.
■ Keep school and other presentations on track.
■ Include fire safety messages in the city’s community videos.
■ Increase social media presence for the community to learn about their fire department and its
services, along with frequent social media postings (Facebook, Instagram, etc.) on
department events, disaster preparedness, all-hazards injury prevention, etc.
■ Social media addresses advertised on apparatus, department letterhead, etc.
■ Development of a KFD YouTube page.
■ Increased social media activity during holidays (when there is an uptick in cooking fires), prior
to and during major weather events, during public education events (Facebook Live, for
example), and live dispatch or live updates from PIO on incidents.
44
The investigation of the cause and origin of fires is also an important part of a comprehensive
CRR system. Determining the cause of fires can help with future prevention efforts. At the time of
this evaluation, the Fire Chief and/or Assistant Fire Chief were charged with initiating the fire
origin and cause determination process. When needed, particularly when the fire involves a
significant loss, injury, or fatality, the KFD can request assistance from the Montana State Fire
Marshal to perform an in-depth investigation. The number of fire investigations completed by the
FMO over the past three year are:
■ 2020: 6 investigations.
■ 2021: 4 investigations.
■ 2022: 6 investigations.
Community Risk Reduction Recommendations:
■ As a long-term planning objective, the City of Kalispell should consider re-establishing a full-
service Fire Prevention Bureau within the KFD. This bureau should be staffed, at a minimum,
with a Fire Marshal (rank of Captain) and one fire inspector (Fire Marshal and inspector should
also be certified to perform fire investigations). The focus of their activities should be on post-
occupancy fire prevention inspections, code enforcement, and education of business and
building owners. (Recommendation No. 13.)
□ The inspector can be either a sworn firefighter or civilian, the latter often being a less costly
option. In this case consideration could be given to utilizing retired KFD personnel provided
there are no negative pension implications.
■ The KFD should implement an in-service company inspection program at residential, medical,
manufacturing, and retail business establishments throughout the city. (Recommendation
No. 14.)
□ The KFD should provide appropriate training to all field personnel in conducting routine fire
prevention inspections, particularly the Captains who will be responsible for supervising their
companies.
■ To fund the KFD’s fire prevention and safety activities the City of Kalispell should consider the
adoption of registration, inspection, and/or permit fees to help offset the actual costs of
providing these services throughout the city. These fees should include inspections conducted
by in-service fire companies. (Recommendation No. 15.)
□ Should the City of Kalispell implement the recommendations above, the KFD should
complete a comprehensive review of the city’s actual costs for providing fire prevention
services. The review should include a full costing of providing all fire prevention services,
reviewing the city’s fire code(s), as well as a comparative analysis of the fees charged for
similar services by other fire departments. The review should be designed to capture the full
range of services provided and capture the full scope of the operational permits and
certain inspections required as part of a comprehensive fire prevention program.
■ The KFD should develop a compelling public education program that includes discussing the
significant life-saving benefits of installing residential fire sprinklers in all new one- and two-
family dwellings. (Recommendation No. 16.)
■ The City of Kalispell should explore possible funding opportunities to encourage businesses to
install smoke alarms and sprinkler systems. (Recommendation No. 17.)
45
■ If the City of Kalispell authorizes the formation of a full-service Fire Prevention Bureau within the
KFD, the KFD should explore the feasibility of utilizing Remote Video Inspections (RIV) to assist
with managing the inspection workload. (Recommendation No. 18.)
■ The KFD should encourage—and if possible, expand—the voluntary home inspection and
assistance program. This is a Best Practice. The program should continue to include the
distribution of smoke detectors to the community. (Recommendation No. 19.)
■ The KFD should provide an inventory of smoke alarms for fire apparatus and ambulances to
take on all calls for installation in residential structures. This recommendation includes a
program where companies conduct free smoke alarm checks on all calls when possible.
(Recommendation No. 20.)
■ The KFD should provide training on basic fire cause and origin determination to all officers. This
will assist with ensuring the cause of every fire that causes damage or injury is determined
while easing the workload for the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief. (Recommendation
No. 21.)
≈ ≈ ≈
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Training is, without question, one of the most essential functions that a fire department can
perform on a regular basis. One could even make a credible argument that training is, in some
ways, more important than emergency responses because a department that is not well-
trained, prepared, and operationally ready will be unable to fulfill its emergency response
obligations and mission. Education and training are vital at all levels of fire service operations to
ensure that necessary functions at an incident are completed correctly, safely, and effectively.
A comprehensive, diverse, and ongoing training program is critical to the fire department’s level
of success.
An effective fire department training program must cover all the essential elements of that
department’s core missions and responsibilities. The level of training or education required for a
set of tasks varies with the jobs to be performed. The program must include an appropriate
combination of technical/didactic training, manipulative or hands-on/practical evolutions, and
training assessment to gauge the effectiveness of these efforts. Most of the training, but
particularly the practical, standardized, hands-on training evolutions should be developed
based upon the department’s own operating procedures and operations while remaining
cognizant of widely accepted practices and standards that could be used as a benchmark to
judge the department’s operations for any number of reasons.
Certain Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations dictate that
minimum training must be completed on an annual basis, covering assorted topics that include:
■ A review of the respiratory protection standard, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA)
refresher and user competency training, SCBA fit testing (29 CFR 1910.134).
■ Blood Borne Pathogens Training (29 CFR 1910.1030).
■ Hazardous Materials Training (29 CFR 1910.120).
■ Confined Space Training (29 CFR 1910.146).
■ Structural Firefighting Training (29 CFR 1910.156).
46
In addition, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards contain recommendations for
training on diverse topics such as a requirement for a minimum of 24 hours of structural
firefighting training annually for each fire department member. Also, the ISO-Fire Suppression
Rating Scale (ISO-FSRS) has certain training requirements for which fire departments receive
credit during the ISO-FSRS review.
Because so much depends upon the ability of the emergency responder to effectively deal with
an emergency, education and training must have a prominent position within an emergency
responder’s schedule of activities when on duty. Education and training programs also help to
create the character of a fire service organization. Agencies that place a real emphasis on their
training tend to be more proficient in performing day-to-day duties. The prioritization of training
also fosters an image of professionalism and instills pride in the organization. Overall, the KFD has
an excellent, robust, and comprehensive training program and there exists a dedicated effort
focused on a wide array of training activities.
The KFD does not have a formal, stand-alone Training Division. The Assistant Fire Chief is primarily
responsible for the department’s training function while a Fire Captain/Paramedic coordinates
EMS training. There are no full-time dedicated personnel assigned to training. Training has
predominantly been provided by peers within the department until last year. In FY2022, the KFD
hosted two courses for Engineers through the Montana State University Fire Service Training
School (FSTS), and one Fire Officer training course offered online through Blue Card. Auto
extrication, ice rescue, aerial ladder operations, peer support, yoga, drone piloting, etc. are
recent training opportunities for KFD members that had outside instructors.
FIGURE 2-17: Probationary KFD Personnel Performing In-Station Training
The KFD hires both certified and non-certified
firefighting personnel based upon a civil service
exam and eligibility list position. However, these
personnel must be certified through the national
registry and the state as either an EMT-A or as a
Paramedic. Regardless of previous firefighter
training or certification levels, all newly hired
firefighters are put through a Montana State
Firefighter I and II academy/certification along
with hazardous materials operations. These classes,
which are conducted by the FSTS, result in
personnel being International Fire Service
Accreditation Commission (IFSAC)/ National Board
on Fire Service Professional Qualifications (NBFSPQ
or Pro Board) Certified FF I/II. Once they have
completed their FF I/II training, an in-house field
training program ensures the new hire’s ability to
demonstrate skills and knowledge of EMS operations, firefighting skills, and KFD’s operations. The
program utilizes daily evaluation sheets, a task book, and a final comprehensive evaluation. The
field training program is accomplished during probation and is one year in duration. The KFD is to
be commended for this program, which CPSM considers to be a Best Practice.
The requirements for personnel seeking promotion to the position of Engineer include three years
as a firefighter with the KFD, Montana State FSTS engineer certification, along with successful
completion of in-house testing and ranking.
47
The KFD utilizes a multistep process at the rank of Captain. The requirements for each step are as
follows:
■ Captain Step I
□ Command and Control/ Blue Card Incident Commander Certification.
□ Incident Safety officer.
□ 1st Leadership/Emergency Systems Management course.
■ Captain Step II
□ Two years as a Captain Step I
□ Fire Instructor I.
□ Fire Officer I.
□ 2nd Leadership / Emergency Services Management course.
■ Captain Step III
□ Two years as a Captain Step II
□ Fire Investigator.
□ Health and Safety Officer.
□ 3d Leadership/ Emergency Services Management course.
The department is planning on hosting training courses in Fall 2023 that will allow officers to be
certified at the Fire Instructor I and Fire Officer I levels. Looking ahead, the KFD should consider
adding additional certification requirements to each level of Captain.
The Assistant Chief informed CPSM that the on-shift and specialized training schedules are
evolving again after having been dormant for several years due to the COVID pandemic. As a
best practice, there should be a goal for each shift to complete some type of group training
every week, or at least several times a month. In-service training should be topic-specific to
either teach or practice important skills and to allow crews to work together in simulated
emergency situations. With any good fire department training program, at least 50 percent of
the drills should include manipulative (hands-on) training to allow for the development of
proficiency and to review critical skills.
FIGURE 2-18: KFD Personnel Performing On-Duty Training
48
CPSM was informed that it is “difficult to meet” daily training targets, including between KFD
companies and with mutual aid departments. It is clearly reasonable that some days it will be
difficult to complete training since various time demands throughout the duty day, including
increasing emergency responses, gradually compete with each other. Yet, in many fire
departments some less-than-efficient time management, and even past practices, can hinder
attempts to provide training for on-duty personnel. We believe that this is at least partially true in
Kalispell. Every effort should be made to make completion of a daily training session a KFD
priority.
Additional daily opportunities for training can be found during related activities such as
daily/weekly apparatus and equipment inspections and fire pre-planning activities. Annual
inspection and testing requirements such as for hose, pumps, hydrant flow testing, etc. can also
provide additional training credits for personnel who participate. Training can and should also
be conducted during evening hours and on weekends.
An area where CPSM noted a deficiency in training for the KFD was in the area of providing all
companies and personnel with high-intensity training on various subjects, including periodic live
fire training on at least a semi-annual basis. However, the team was informed that although the
department has had some success in obtaining vacant structures to train in the lack of a
permanent training facility with live fire capabilities hampers the ability to conduct such training.
The only local training facilities with live fire “burn buildings” are at the West Valley Fire
Department and in Columbia Falls. CPSM encourages the KFD to move forward and attempt to
provide all personnel with this type of training, including live fire, a minimum of twice per year,
with quarterly being preferred.
FIGURE 2-19: KFD Personnel Performing High-Intensity Training
This type of training—including training involving live fire—is very difficult for on-duty personnel to
perform due to the need to retain the personnel for immediate emergency response. Larger
departments can take a company or two out of service for this type of training, but Kalispell’s
staffing and deployment makes this impossible.
The KFD utilizes Vector Solutions as its platform for all department in-service training. Vector
Solutions offers a robust course catalog for fire and EMS training that can be utilized to meet all
federal, state, and local public safety training mandates. Vector Solutions can also provide the
platform for scheduling training and managing all training records and reports. The use of this
program helps to ensure that there is a reliable and accurate database for tracking and
retrieving all department-level training and for recording and tracking the status of certifications
for all personnel.
49
On the EMS side of operations, training programs and requirements are primarily driven by the
mandatory nature of continuing education and recertification requirements for various levels of
practitioners. All levels of EMS training require continuing education credits on a multiyear cycle
for recertification. If individual personnel, or the agency, were to not keep up with required
training and/or certification requirements they could lose their ability to practice or provide the
prescribed levels of service. In Montana, the state certifying agency is the Montana Board of
Medical Examiners.
Best Practice Medicine provide EMT-A and Paramedic recertification training. A KFD Captain
assists with coordinating and providing this training. Whenever possible, fire training should be
tied into EMS continuing education credits, providing dual discipline benefit for personnel. Since
EMS incidents make up a large percentage of the department’s responses, ensuring that these
certifications continue to be maintained should remain a significant component of the
department’s training focus.
Professional development for fire department personnel, especially officers, is also an important
part of overall training. There are numerous excellent opportunities for firefighters and officers to
attend training on a wide range of topics outside of Kalispell, including those offered at various
state firefighting academies, at the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, Maryland, and at
national conferences such as the Fire Department Instructor’s Conference (FDIC), Fire Rescue
International, and the annual Firehouse Expo. CPSM was informed that although a few officers
have attended NFA, most have so far declined to take advantage of this excellent opportunity.
Beyond the practical benefits to be gained from personnel participating in outside training,
encouraging personnel to earn and/or maintain various specialized certifications such as Fire
Instructor or Fire Officer increases the positive professional perception of the organization and
can help to demonstrate a commitment to continued excellence.
As of the time of this assessment the KFD’s officer development program was a work in progress;
additional training is planned for Fall 2023. The department is to be commended for this effort
and given the support to continue to develop this program.
KFD officers typically provide feedback to personnel regarding their performance but there is no
formal testing or skills assessments for fire training in the department. Training is a required activity
in the fire service and thus it is essential to incorporate a formal testing process as part of the
learning effort. EMS skills assessments, both practical and written, are regularly incorporated into
EMS training. Traditionally, fire departments are reluctant to incorporate skills testing into their fire
training components. However, an increasingly common way to evaluate the department’s
training program is through annual skills proficiency evaluations where all members of the
department are required to successfully perform certain skills or complete standardized
evolutions, either individually or as part of a team.
The ability to monitor and record training test scores is beneficial from an overall proficiency
standpoint. In addition, training scores should be incorporated into the annual performance
appraisal process for both the employee, his/her supervisor, and the training staff. In addition,
the concept of adding a testing process to each training evolution adds to the importance and
seriousness in which these activities are carried out.
The KFD does not currently utilize a formal task book process to provide training guidance and
new rank orientation, with the exception being probationary firefighters. A growing number of
fire departments are employing task books for personnel who aspire to (or in some cases have
already been promoted to) higher rank. Use of task books would be appropriate in the KFD for
firefighter, Engineer, and the various steps for Captain. The successful completion of any task
book can be considered as a prerequisite for promotion to higher rank or step, or alternatively,
50
can be a required element of the post-promotional evaluation and probationary process. These
efforts can help provide newly promoted personnel with the tools needed to operate both
administratively and in field settings. The completion of the task book could also qualify
individuals to assume acting Engineer and Captain assignments in which they receive practical
experience and on-the-job training.
Beyond the establishment of requirements to achieve certain levels of certification for
promotion, the department should consider the implementation of a formal professional
development program for all department personnel. The program should attempt to strike an
appropriate balance between technical/practical task books, simulator training, formal
certifications, mentor relationship, and outside influences. Where practical, best practices
identified by the NFA, NFPA, ISO, IFSTA, IFSAC, Montana Firefighters Training Council, MIOSHA,
and the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) should be incorporated.
Fire Education, Training, and Professional Development
Recommendations:
■ The KFD should make it a priority to implement daily in-station training lasting one to two hours
each duty day. (Recommendation No. 22.)
■ The KFD should continue to develop and budget for its company fire officer training and
development program. To further enhance the program the department should consider
components that are competency-based on National Fire Protection Association (NFPA),
International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), and International Fire Service Training
Association (IFSTA) standards, and that focus on contemporary fire service issues including
community fire protection and emergency services delivery approaches, fire prevention
practices, firefighter safety and risk management, and labor/staff relations; reviewing,
approving, or preparing technical documents and specifications, departmental policies,
standard operating procedures and other formal internal communications; improving
organizational performance through process improvement and best practices initiatives; and
having a working knowledge of information management and technology systems.
(Recommendation No. 23.)
■ The KFD should consider increasing the requirements for further step advancements at the
Captain level. (Recommendation No. 24.)
These requirements should include:
□ Captain Step I
● Fire Instructor I.
● Fire Officer I.
● NFA Command and Control for Company Level Officers.
● IMS Level 300.
□ Captain Step II
● Fire Instructor II.
● Fire Officer II.
● NFA Command and Control of Incident Operations.
□ Captain Step III
51
● Fire Officer III.
● IMS Level 400.
● NFA Command and Control of Fire Department Operations at Target Hazards.
■ The KFD should develop task books for firefighter, Engineer, and each Captain step. For ranks
other than probationary firefighter, all personnel aspiring for promotion to a higher rank should
successfully complete all elements of that rank’s task book to be eligible to participate in the
formal promotional testing process. (Recommendation No. 25.)
■ The KFD should develop a plan—including providing appropriate funding—to provide all
companies and personnel with mandatory, off-duty, high-intensity training on various subjects,
including periodic live fire training on at least a semi-annual basis, with quarterly being
preferred. (Recommendation No. 26.)
■ The KFD should institute written and practical skills testing and proficiency evaluations (non-
punitive) as part of the department’s comprehensive fire training program. (Recommendation
No. 27.)
■ The City of Kalispell in consultation with the KFD should consider providing funding for the KFD
to procure an appropriate training facility where the department can safety perform
NFPA 1403-compliant live fire training and other basic and advanced/complex evolutions for
all personnel on at least a semi-annual (quarterly preferred) basis. Consideration should also
be given to approaching this project as a county-wide or regional endeavor.
(Recommendation No. 28.)
FIGURE 2-20: Typical Fire Training Tower and Burn Building
■ The KFD should make a concerted effort to send as many officers as possible to the National
Fire Academy (NFA). This should include the Assistant Chief (or future dedicated Training
Officer) for various training-related classes, and the Fire Marshal (if the city re-establishes a
dedicated fire prevention bureau within the Fire Department) for fire prevention and
community risk reduction classes. Any officers who meet the admissions criteria should be
encouraged to enroll in the Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program. (Recommendation
No. 29.)
■ The KFD should look for opportunities to provide periodic joint training between the
department and various agencies that provide automatic/mutual aid to the city, including in
52
the evening and on weekends. Consideration should also be given to hosting large-scale
exercises to test and evaluate regional interoperability. (Recommendation No. 30.)
≈ ≈ ≈
53
ISO-PPC ANALYSIS
The ISO is a national, not-for-profit organization that collects and evaluates information from
communities across the United States regarding their capabilities to combat building fires. ISO
conducts field evaluations in an effort to rate communities and their relative ability to provide
fire protection and mitigate fire risk. This evaluation allows ISO to determine and publish a Public
Protection Classification (PPC) rating of Class 1/1X to Class 9 (Class 10 are areas with no fire
protection) for the community.
Class 1 (highest classification/lowest numerical score) represents an exemplary community fire
suppression program as outlined below. In contrast, a Class 9 score indicates that the
community’s fire suppression program does not meet ISO's minimum criteria. It is important to
understand the PPC is not just a fire department classification, but a compilation of community
services that include the fire department, the emergency communications center, and the
community’s water supply system operator. A lower numerical rating makes the community
more attractive from an insurance risk perspective, so insurance costs are generally reduced for
businesses and homeowners. A community's PPC grade depends on:
■ Emergency Communications: A maximum of 10 points of a community’s overall score is based
on how well the fire department receives and dispatches fire alarms. ISO field representatives
evaluate:
□ The emergency reporting system.
□ The communications center, including the number of telecommunicators.
□ Computer-aided dispatch (CAD) facilities.
□ The dispatch circuits and how the center notifies firefighters about the location of the
emergency.
■ Fire Department: A maximum of 50 points of the overall score is based on the fire department.
ISO representatives review the fire companies and check that the fire department tests its
pumps regularly and inventories each engine and ladder company’s equipment according
to NFPA 1901. ISO also reviews the fire company records to determine factors such as:
□ Type and extent of training provided to fire company personnel.
□ Number of people who participate in training.
□ Firefighter response to emergencies
□ Maintenance and testing of the fire department’s equipment.
■ Water Supply: A maximum of 40 points of the overall score is based on the community’s water
supply. This part of the assessment focuses on whether the community has sufficient water
supply for fire suppression beyond daily maximum consumption. ISO surveys all components of
the water supply system and reviews fire hydrant inspections and frequency of flow testing.
■ Community Risk Reduction: The Community Risk Reduction section of the FSRS offers a
maximum of 5.5 points, resulting in 105.5 total points available in the FSRS. The inclusion of this
section for “extra points” allows recognition for those communities that employ effective fire
prevention practices, without unduly affecting those who have not yet adopted such
measures. The addition of Community Risk Reduction gives incentives to those communities
that strive proactively to reduce fire severity through a structured program of fire prevention
activities. The areas of community risk reduction evaluated in this section include:
54
□ Fire prevention.
□ Fire safety education.
□ Fire investigation.
Many communities view achieving a Class 1 (or a low ISO rating overall) as an accolade.
Therefore, when it is possible, maintaining a favorable rating or lowering an ISO score is often
included in a community’s strategic plan.
Overall, the community PPC rating for Kalispell (2020) yielded 70.69 out of 105.5 earned credits,
leading to a 3/3Y rating.15 This is a satisfactory score (and class), yet highlights areas for
improvement. However, there is a caveat to this, in that the overall points from the most recent
evaluation fell 1.94 points since 2015.16 The current rating puts the city just 0.69 points into the
Class 3/3Y rating. If the rating declines again, the city will most likely drop to a Class 4 rating.
FIGURE 2-21: ISO PPC Ratings in the U.S.
15. ISO 2020 Report and Synopsis Memorandum (2020)
16. ISO 2015 report
City of Kalispell
55
FIGURE 2-22: ISO PPC Ratings in Montana
The following table is a summary and comparison of Kalispell’s 2015 and 2020 ISO ratings.
§ § §
City of Kalispell
56
TABLE 2-4: City of Kalispell ISO Earned Credit Overview
FSRS Component Credit
Available
Earned
Credit
2015
Earned
Credit
2020
Difference
414. Credit for Emergency Reporting 3 2.40 3 +0.6
422. Credit for Telecommunicators 4 3.20 4 +0.8
4.32. Credit for Dispatch Circuits 3 1.88 2.46 +0.58
440. Credit for Emergency
Communications 10 7.48 9.46 +1.98
513. Credit for Engine Companies 6 4.48 5.63 +1.15
523. Credit for Reserve Pumpers .5 0.40 0.00 -0.40
532. Credit for Pump Capacity 3 3.0 3 N/C
549. Credit for Ladder Service 4 3.91 0.82 -3.08
553. Credit for Reserve Ladder and
Service Trucks .5 0.00 0.00 N/C
561. Credit for Deployment Analysis 10 3.78 4.72 +0.94
571. Credit for Company Personnel 15 8.40 7.41 -0.99
581. Credit for Training 9 6.56 3.42 -3.14
730. Credit for Operational
Considerations 2 2 2 N/C
590. Credit for Fire Department 50 32.53 27.00 -5.53
616. Credit for Supply System 30 28.03 29.72 +1.69
621. Credit for Fire Hydrants 3 3 3 N/C
631. Credit for Inspection and Flow Testing 7 0.00 5.60 +5.60
640. Credit for Water Supply 40 31.03 38.32 +7.29
Divergence --- -2.50 -8.36 -5.86
1050. Community Risk Reduction 5.50 4.09 4.27 +0.18
Total 105.50 72.63 70.69 -1.94
This table shows that the Emergency Commutations, Water Supply, and Community Risk
Reduction credits are very good. Some positive items of note from one ISO evaluation to the
next are:
■ The KFD improved its Credit for Emergency Communications by 1.98 points. The city is just 0.54
points away from maximum credit for this section.
■ The KFD received additional points for both Credit for Engine Companies and Credit for
Deployment Analysis of 1.15 and 0.94 points, respectively.
■ The city received a significant increase of 7.29 points for Credit for Water Supply. The city is
now just 1.68 points from receiving maximum credit for this component of the evaluation.
■ The city earned a slight increase of 0.18 points under Community Risk Reduction.
The Fire Department credits have room for improvement, specifically improving credits in
Reserve Pumpers and Ladder trucks, Ladder Service, Deployment Analysis, Company Personnel,
57
and Training sections. On the negative side, point reductions from one evaluations to the next
are:
■ Credit for Reserve Pumpers – ISO provides credits for the number and adequacy of pumpers
(engines) and their equipment within. The number of needed reserve engines and ladder
trucks is one for each eight needed in a community, or fraction thereof. There is one reserve
pumper in the city, which would be adequate for the City of Kalispell. However, the credit for
engine companies is calculated by ISO based on an agency’s capability to provide 3500
GPM from three engine companies. To achieve the 3500 GPM standard, the reserve pumper
was utilized, thus negating the reserve credit.
■ ISO provides credit for the number of response areas within the city with five buildings that are
three or more stories (or 35 feet or more in height), or with five or more buildings that have a
Fire Flow requirement greater than 3,500 GPM. The height of all buildings in the city, including
those protected by automatic sprinklers, is considered when determining the number of
needed ladder companies.
■ The KFD lost 3.08 points for Credit for Ladder Service due to several factors, but in its simplest
form, the fact that the city utilizes Ladder 642, which is a quint, as both an engine and a
ladder (and is primarily an engine/pumper) costs points as ISO will not give full credit for both.
In addition, the fact that it is stationed at Station 62, rather than at Station 61’s downtown
location (not within 2.5 road miles of all buildings three stories or greater or that require 3500
GPM or more fire flow) also results in a point loss. To receive full credit for the ladder, the KFD
would need to:
□ Staff an additional pumper at Station 62 along with Ladder 642.
□ Have a ladder truck stationed downtown also, or within 2 ½ road miles of all buildings of
three stories or more in height or that require 3,500 GPM or more for fire flow.
■ The KFD does not have a reserve ladder truck, so it did not earn 0.5 points for that. When the
one and only ladder truck is down for service, repairs, out providing mutual aid, etc., the city is
without a ladder truck.
■ The Credit for Deployment Analysis section measures the number of fire units staffed at ISO or
NFPA standards that are available to respond to incidents within the city. ISO provides credits
for the percentage of the community within specified response distances, which is 1.5 miles for
pumpers and 2.5 miles for a ladder truck. As an alternative, a fire protection area may use the
results of a systemic performance evaluation; an evaluation analyzing CAD history to
demonstrate that, with its current deployment of companies, the fire department meets the
time constraints for initial arriving engine and initial full-alarm assignment as specified by NFPA
1710. KFD receive reduced points in this section also because of the cross-staffing of the
ladder truck with EMS units.
□ The KFD would need to add staffed and equipped apparatus that can respond
immediately (no cross-staffing) to increase its points in this section. These units would also
need to meet the response area and time frames specified.
■ The section on Credit for Company Personnel simply looks at the department’s staffing
practices based upon averages. It also includes automatic aid companies and on-call
personnel that fall within a five-road mile status or response times as recommended by NFPA
standards.
□ To receive additional points in this area KFD would most likely need to increase staffing. The
addition of a third station would also probably help.
58
■ Credit for Training provides credit for training facilities and their use, training (general),
company training at fire stations, training and certification of fire officers, driver/operator,
hazardous materials, and recruit training, and building familiarization and pre-incident
planning inspections. KFD received full points for its recruit training and existing driver and
operator training. The KFD is to be commended for this. However, overall, the KFD lost
3.14 points from the previous ISO evaluation. CPSM discussed this issue with the Fire Chief and
was informed that ISO had reported the following:
□ Even though station 62 has training components associated with it, it is not a true training
facility to ISO standards. A training facility that meets ISO requirements would need to be
established.
□ The KFD has struggled with keeping up with ISO training standards, which are approximately
20 hours per member/per month. Prior to the assessment, the fire department was required
to switch software companies for the program required to track and store training logs for
the department. A number of years of training documentation did not transfer to the new
software and this documentation was lost in the transition. A significant number of points
were lost in the most recent assessment due to this.
● Better tracking of training hours would be required for the KFD to achieve more points in
this section.
● A better assessment of training types would also need to be reviewed.
● CPSM was informed that the current software for tracking training meets these points and
will allow the KFD to better meet ISO requirements.
□ Recommendations that could assist with these areas are included in the previous section on
Training and Professional Development.
□ Fire department staff would also need more time available to conduct pre-fire planning
inspections. This is addressed later in Section 4 on Fire Operations.
■ KFD’s credit for Divergence fell 5.85 points between evaluations. For the divergence analysis,
when a fire departments apparatus and personnel points fall below the capabilities of the
water system for the city, the department loses what are called divergence points.
□ To receive 8.36 points, the KFD would need to place additional fire suppression apparatus
and personnel into service.
There are multiple recommendations made throughout this report that if implemented should
improve KFD’s ISO rating. CPSM believes that with the potential enhancements to staffing and
deployment by the KFD, including the potential addition of a third fire station, should make
earning an ISO Class 2 rating achievable for Kalispell.
§ § §
59
FLEET ANALYSIS
The resources that the fire department uses to perform its core mission and mitigate a wide
range of emergency incidents are generally divided into two major categories, apparatus, and
tools/equipment.
Apparatus generally includes the department’s motorized vehicle fleet and includes the major
emergency response apparatus such as engines (pumpers), aerial apparatus including towers
and ladders, rescue vehicles, and ambulances. Specialized apparatus includes emergency units
such as lighting vehicles, brush trucks, and other off-road vehicles. They also often include trailers
for specialized applications such as technical rescue, hazardous materials response/equipment,
hazardous material decontamination, structural collapse rescue equipment, breathing air/light
support units, foam units/supplies, and mass casualty incident supplies. Support vehicles that are
critical to fire department operations, both routine and emergency, include command post and
emergency communications units, command/staff vehicles, and maintenance trucks.
The geography, infrastructure, hazards, and construction features within the community all play
a major role in determining the composition of each department’s unique and individualized
apparatus fleet and equipment inventory. Kalispell’s characteristics present the fire service with
a wide variety of strategic and tactical challenges related to emergency response
preparedness and mitigation. This includes fire suppression operations, emergency medical
responses, and complex incidents requiring special operations capabilities such as technical
rescue and hazardous materials emergencies.
Large commercial buildings, mid/high-rise structures, and a diverse mixture of target hazards
present much different operational hazards and challenges than those required for operations in
single-family dwellings. These factors, as well as projected future needs, must be taken into
consideration when specifying and purchasing apparatus and equipment. Every effort should
be made to make new apparatus as versatile and multifunctional/capable as is possible and
practical.
Fire department apparatus are designed and intended to transport firefighters and fire and life
safety equipment to the scene of an emergency. The provision of an operationally ready and
strategically located fleet of mission-essential fire and rescue vehicles is fundamental to the
ability of a fire-rescue department to deliver reliable and efficient public safety within a
community. Modern, reliable vehicles are needed to deliver responders and the
equipment/materials they deploy to the scene of dispatched emergencies within the city.
The procurement, maintenance, and eventual replacement of response vehicles is one of the
largest expenses incurred in sustaining a community’s fire-rescue department. Reliable vehicles
are needed to deliver responders and the equipment/materials they employ to the scene of
dispatched emergencies within the city. A well-planned and documented emergency vehicle
replacement plan (capital improvement plan) ensures ongoing preservation of a safe, reliable,
and operationally capable response fleet. A plan must also include a schedule for future capital
outlay in a manner that is affordable to the community.
NFPA 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus, serves as a guide to the manufacturers that
build fire apparatus and for the fire departments that purchase them. NFPA 1901 is updated
every five years using input from the public/stakeholders through a formal review process. The
committee membership is made up of representatives from the fire service, manufacturers,
consultants, and special interest groups. The committee monitors various issues and problems
that occur with fire apparatus and attempts to develop standards that address those issues. A
60
primary interest of the committee over the years has been improving firefighter safety and
reducing fire apparatus crashes. A key component of NFPA 1901 states:
“It is recommended that apparatus greater than 15 years old that have been
properly maintained and that are still in serviceable condition be placed in
reserve status and upgraded in accordance with NFPA 1912, Standard for Fire
Apparatus Refurbishing (2016), to incorporate as many features as possible of the
current fire apparatus standard. This will ensure that, while the apparatus might
not totally comply with the current edition of the automotive fire apparatus
standards, many improvements and upgrades required by the recent versions of
the standards are available to the firefighters who use the apparatus.”
Under the NFPA1912 standard there are two types of refurbishments a fire department can
choose. These are Level 1 and Level 2 refurbishments. According to NFPA 1912, a Level 1
refurbishment includes the assembly of a new fire apparatus by the use of a new chassis frame,
driving and crew compartment, front axle, steering and suspension components, and the use of
either new components or components from existing apparatus for the remainder of the
apparatus. A Level 2 refurbishment includes the upgrade of major components or systems of a
fire apparatus with components or systems of a fire apparatus that comply with the applicable
standards in effect at the time the original apparatus was manufactured.
A few important points to note regarding the NFPA 1912 standard regarding the refurbishment of
heavy fire apparatus. These are:17
■ Apparatus that was not manufactured to applicable NFPA fire apparatus standards or that is 25
years old should be replaced. Some departments will utilize vehicles such as this (frontline but
not regularly utilized) for longer than 25 years. CPSM does not recommend this practice;
however, we understand the financial burden of replacing heavy fire apparatus. It is up to the
department and municipality regarding the management of older fire apparatus and the risks
these may pose to firefighters and the public who share the road with them.
■ A vehicle that undergoes a Level 1 refurbishing receives a new make and model designation
and a new Certificate of Origin for the year of refurbishment. Apparatus receiving a Level 1
refurbishing are intended to meet the current edition of the NFPA automotive fire apparatus
standard. This is the optimal level of refurbishing.
■ A vehicle that undergoes a Level 2 refurbishing retains its original make and model
identification as well as its original title and year of manufacture designation. Apparatus
receiving Level 2 refurbishing are intended to meet the NFPA automotive fire apparatus
standard in effect when the apparatus was manufactured.
It is a generally accepted fact that fire department apparatus and vehicles, like all types of
mechanical devices, have a finite life. A primary impetus for these recommended service life
thresholds is continual advances in occupant safety. Despite good stewardship and
maintenance of emergency vehicles in sound operating condition, there are many advances in
occupant safety, such as fully enclosed cabs, enhanced rollover protection and air bags, three-
point restraints, antilock brakes, higher visibility, cab noise abatement/hearing protection, and a
host of other improvements as reflected in each revision of NFPA 1901. These improvements
provide safer response vehicles for those providing emergency services within the community, as
well those “sharing the road” with these responders.
17. NFPA 1912, Standard for Fire Apparatus Refurbishing, 2016 Edition.
61
Today's fire departments are obligated to establish and document formal programs and
procedures to ensure that equipment is replaced regularly, maintained properly, and deployed
in accordance with accepted standards and department procedures. Proper training on the
use and maintenance of equipment is essential to effective and safe firefighter performance
and minimizes the fire department and city’s risk exposure.
The current KFD fire apparatus fleet consists of two (2) pumpers (1 frontline, 1 reserve), one (1)
quint/aerial ladder,18 one (1) brush engine, three (3) ALS-capable transport ambulances, one (1)
hazardous material response unit and trailer, and (2) command vehicles (Fire Chief and Assistant
Fire Chief). The age of the major firefighting apparatus currently in service ranges from 20 years
old for Reserve Engine 633, which is a spare pumper, to five years old for Engine 631. The three
ambulances range in age from three to 17 years. The apparatus fleet as a whole, even the older
units in it, all appear to be in very good to excellent condition, well maintained, and with the
equipment stowed in an orderly fashion. When considering apparatus usage, hours on the motor
and pumps hours must be taken into consideration. Fire apparatus typically spend more time
idling while at emergency scenes or throttled up when operating the fire pump. A rule of thumb
that can be used is that each hour on the motor is the equivalent of 30 to 35 miles of actual
road usage.
The KFD emergency vehicle inventory, age, and station assignment are outlined in the following
table.
TABLE 2-5: KFD Full Fleet Listing and Age
Unit # Year Make Model Pump Size
(GPM)
Tank Size
(Gallons)
Station 61
Engine 631 2018 Spartan/Smeal Engine 2,000 750
Reserve
Engine 633
2003 American
LaFrance
Engine 2,000 750
Medic 621 2006 Ford F-450 Horton Medic Unit
Haz. Mat.
Truck 671
2014 International Haz. Mat. trailer haul
vehicle
Haz. Mat
Trailer 670
Car 601 2014 Toyota Tundra Fire Chief
Car 602 2016 Toyota Tundra Assistant Fire Chief
Station 62
Ladder 642 2008 Smeal 105-foot Quint/Aerial 2,000 500
Brush 682 2005 Chevrolet/Kodiak Brush Unit 150 300
Medic 622 2016 Ford F-450 Osage Warrior Medic
Unit
Medic 624 2020 Ford F-450 Osage Warrior Medic
Unit
Utility 673 2000 Ford F-350 Utility vehicle and
snowplow
18. A quint fire truck is an apparatus that combines the equipment capabilities of a ladder truck and the
water-pumping ability of a fire engine. As its name implies, it features five main tools to carry out firefighting
functions: pump, water tank, fire hose, aerial device, and ground ladders.
62
All KFD apparatus appears to be in good condition with normal wear and tear. Equipment within
all apparatus is comprehensive and common with industry trends. Items within appear modern,
secure, clean, and in good condition.
One of the biggest factors that can impact the serviceable life of an apparatus is the level of
preventive maintenance that it receives. NFPA 1911 provides guidance on this important aspect
of fire department support operations. Apparatus manufacturers also identify suggested
programs and procedures to be performed at various intervals. As apparatus ages it is
reasonable to expect that parts will wear out and need to be replaced. It follows then that
maintenance costs and overall operating expenses will increase. As a result, cost history and
projected costs for the future must be considered as a factor in determining when to replace, or
refurbish, a fire apparatus. In addition, reliability of the apparatus must be considered.
Experiencing low downtime and high parts availability are critical factors for emergency
equipment maintenance and serviceability. A proactive preventive maintenance program can
assist with holding costs to an acceptable level. The Annex Material in NFPA 1911 contains
recommendations and worksheets to assist in decision making in vehicle replacement.
The City of Kalispell provides routine vehicle repairs and maintenance to the KFD fleet using the
city’s maintenance shop. In addition, limited preventive maintenance is completed by some
personnel within each of their stations. More complex and/or warranty work on the vehicles is
performed by either the dealer of the apparatus, or a regional vendor who is contracted to do
the work. Regarding maintenance and repair to apparatus, a few key points to remember are:
■ Ensuring that preventive maintenance programs are developed and implemented for fire
apparatus according to manufacturer’s guidelines and national consensus standards.
■ Ensuring that preventive maintenance on fire apparatus is performed and/or overseen by
qualified personnel who meet the certification requirements outlined in NFPA 1071, Standard
for Emergency Vehicle Technician Professional Qualifications.
■ Develop and utilize policies and procedures that monitor preventive maintenance and other
automotive services performed by vendors.
CPSM noted that annual pump and ladder testing on the apparatus is performed utilizing
outside vendors. Test results provide an indicator of apparatus condition and are a valuable tool
in budget planning. Often, because of this testing, minor maintenance issues can be resolved
which will delay or eliminate the need for major repairs in the future. It is also important to
remember that from a safety and performance perspective, this annual testing needs to be
completed to ensure the overall rating, capacity, and functionality of the pumps and ladders
are reliable during emergency incidents.
The City of Kalispell does maintain a five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that is reviewed
and updated annually. In the FY 2022/2023 fiscal year, the city ordered a new fire pumper at a
cost of $907,000. The following table shows the five-year (2024–2028) CIP for the KFD.
63
TABLE 2-6: KFD Fire Operations CIP, 2024–2028
FIRE DEPARTMENT PROJECT 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total
NEW FIRE ENGINE-PUMPER-
Financed for 10 years
($860,000)
$0
PORTABLE-MOBILE RADIO
REPLACEMENTS (Contingent on
receiving Radio Grant)
$106,000 $106,000 $212,000
NEW BRUSH APPARATUS
CHASSIS (Contingent on
receiving Radio Grant+ AFG
co-pay)
$120,000 $120,000
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT (1/2T
Crew Cab)
$65,000 $68,000 $133,000
NEW FIRE ENGINE-PUMPER- For
new station paid by impact
fees
$950,000 $950,000
LADDER TRUCK REPLACEMENT
(20 years of age)
$1,900,000 $1,900,000
STATION 63 $5,500,000 $5,500,000
TOTAL $226,000 $171,000 $6,710,000 $68,000 $1,900,000 $9,075,000
The next table illustrates the CIP for ambulance-related purchases funded by the EMS fund. In
2023 the city and KFD purchased a new ambulance with cash that will be a 2025 model.
TABLE 2-7: KFD Ambulance CIP, 2024–2028
PROJECT 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 TOTAL
Transport Ambulance $310,000 $325,000 $635,000
Total $0 $0 $310,000 $0 $325,000 $635,000
Fleet Recommendations:
■ CPSM recommends new apparatus (including the recently ordered pumper and ambulance)
and staff/command vehicles be designed with clean cab concepts.19 (Recommendation
No. 31.)
□ Non-porous waterproof flooring for ease of cleaning.
□ Seat material should be vinyl or other material that reduces absorption of toxic materials
and is easier to clean.
□ Filtered ventilation systems; routine cab filter changes.
□ No contaminated equipment (SCBAs, fire hose, contaminated PPE, etc.) should be brought
into the cab.
19. Full clean cab concepts: https://www.iaff.org/wp-content/uploads/FFCancer_CleanCab.pdf
64
□ All interior material used in the cab should be easy to clean and designed to repel moisture.
The material must also be durable enough to be cleaned weekly with disinfecting agents
and/or soap and water.
□ All apparatus should have a designated PPE compartment separate from the cab.
■ CPSM recommends that after the new ladder scheduled for purchase in FY 2028 is delivered,
that the existing quint apparatus be retained as a reserve ladder. This will also help the city’s
ISO rating and more importantly not leave the city without an aerial when the primary ladder
is out of service for any reason, or committed to mutual aid, training, etc. (Recommendation
No. 32.)
≈ ≈ ≈
KFD FACILITIES
Fire Facilities are designed and intended for housing fire department personnel and applicable
equipment to allow the fastest and safest response possible within the specific response area.
Strategic distribution of fire facilities ensures effective services and coverage is achieved. That is,
response travel times satisfy prevailing community goals and national best practices and
standards. Station design and location goes hand-in-hand with strategic fire ground (or patient
needs) priorities. 20
Fire facilities are critical infrastructure within a community. Depending on the scope of services,
size, and complexity, other facilities may be necessary to support items such as emergency
communications, personnel training, fleet and essential equipment maintenance, and supply
storage and distribution. Main headquarters buildings may house conference rooms, computer
rooms, an administrative area, training rooms, evidence rooms, civilian offices, etc.
Personnel-oriented needs in fire facilities must enable the performance of 24-hour daily duties in
support of response operations. For personnel, fire facilities must have provisions for essential
equipment and supplies; space and amenities for administrative office work, training, physical
fitness, laundering, meal preparation, and personal hygiene/comfort.
Occupant safety is a key element of effective facility design. This begins with small details such
as the quality of finish on bay floors and nonslip treads on stairwell steps to decrease tripping/fall
hazards, or use of hands-free plumbing fixtures and easily disinfected surfaces/countertops to
promote infection control. Fire facilities should have specialized equipment such as an exhaust
recovery system to capture and remove cancer-causing by-products of diesel fuel exhaust
emissions and should incorporate best practices for achieving a safe and hygienic work
environment. Likewise, facility design should carefully consider lavatories/showers in close
proximity of dorm rooms, desired segregations, and break rooms or fitness areas that are remote
from sleeping quarters.
Furnishings, fixtures, and equipment selections should provide thoughtful consideration of the
around-the-clock occupancy inherit to fire facilities. Durability is essential, given the accelerated
wear and life cycle of systems and goods in facilities that are constantly occupied and
operational. Safety and security systems should be installed such as a controlled access system
(employee card access for example), closed-circuit TV near entry points, parking lots, employee
parking, and in secure rooms such as narcotics storage.
20. FEMA Publications – Fire Facility Designs.
65
National standards such as NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety,
Health, and Wellness Programs, outlines standards that transfer to facilities such as infection
control, personnel and equipment decontamination, cancer prevention, storage of protective
clothing, and employee fitness. NFPA 1851, Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of
Protective Ensembles for Structural Firefighting and Proximity Fire Fighting, further delineates
laundering standards for protective clothing and facility wear. Laundry areas in fire facilities
continue to evolve and are being separated from living areas to reduce contamination. Factors
such as wastewater removal and air flow need to be considered in a facility design.
Ergonomic layouts and corresponding space-adjacent planning is critical for fire facilities.
Internal adjacency design is driven by response times. The location of the residential and living
areas must accommodate quick and clear access to the apparatus room for response. It is
essential that crews are able to get from any point of the fire station to the fire apparatus within
80 second up receipt of an alarm (aka: “turnout time”) for a fire suppression response or a
response requiring full personal protective clothing (PPE) and within 60 seconds for a medical
response.21 The following graph shows the complete response algorithm.
FIGURE 2-23: Fire Service Response Time Algorithm – Turnout Time
Fire facilities often serve as a de facto “safe haven” during local community emergencies, and
also serve as likely command center for large-scale, campaign emergency incidents. Therefore,
design details and construction materials and methods should embrace the goal of having a
facility that can perform in an uninterrupted manner despite prevailing climatic conditions,
natural disasters, or disruption of utilities. Programmatic details, such as the provision of an
emergency generator connected to automatic transfer switching—even going as far as to
provide tertiary redundancy of power supply via a “piggyback” roll-up generator with manual
transfer (should the primary generator fail)—provide effective safeguards that permit the fire
department to function fully during local emergencies when response activity predictably
peaks. Fire facilities should conform to all building and fire codes—fire facilities should have fire
sprinkler systems.
Fire facilities are exposed to some of the most intense and demanding uses of any public local
government facility, as they are occupied 24 hours a day by a crew of three to six or more. Fire
facilities must enable performance of daily duties in support of response operations such as
vehicle maintenance and repair areas, and storage areas for essential equipment and supplies.
21. NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency
Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments.
66
Fire facilities shall be accessible and should be welcoming. Parking and walkways to the lobby
of the station and emergency phone should follow ADA requirements to allow all members of
the community to be able to approach the station for assistance. Station site configuration,
building orientation, and exterior façade should provide a clear understanding of the location a
community member should go to receive help, often the primary entry of the facility. Fire
facilities should have a marquee or electric signs displaying important community fire and life
safety information.
Equipment-oriented needs in fire facilities are critical—fire stations must be designed and
constructed to accommodate both current and forecast trends in fire service vehicle type and
manufactured dimensions. A facility must have sufficiently sized bay doors; circulation space
between garaged vehicles; departure and return aprons of adequate length and turn
geometry to ensure safe response (or preferred drive-through apparatus bays); and oil separator
floor drains to satisfy environmental concerns. Vehicle bay areas should also consider future
tactical vehicles that may need to be added to the fleet to address forecast response
challenges, even if this consideration merely incorporates civil design that ensures adequate
parcel space for additional bays to be constructed in the future.
In sum, today’s modern fire stations are safe, high-tech, and high-functioning community
infrastructure, and meet all government guidelines and regulations. For the emergency
personnel who inhabit these stations, these buildings are, in a sense, a home away from home.
The City of Kalispell currently operates out of two fire stations strategically located in the city.
FIGURE 2-24: KFD Fire Stations
Kalispell Fire Station 61
Address 312 1st Avenue, East
Year Built 1979/2010
Age 44/13
Square Footage 15,326 Square Feet
Number of Bays 4 - Double Deep, 2 - w/ Drive Thru Capability
1 – Single Deep w/ No Drive Through Capability
Number of Annual Responses 2,911
Attributes
Serves as a fire station and Fire Administration facility.
With revenue from a $1.3M FEMA grant, the station was
reconfigured and updated in 2010 including improved
training and day room space, installation of improved
sleeping accommodations.
67
Kalispell Fire Station 62
Address 255 Old Reserve Drive
Year Built 2006
Age 17
Square Footage 12,450
Number of Bays 3 – All Double Deep w/ Drive Through Capability
Number of Annual Responses 2,997
Attributes
New, modern, state-of-the-art facility.
This station also houses a satellite office for the Kalispell
Police Department and a training room that is available to
the surrounding community.
The CPSM team toured both city fire stations. Our tour and review of the city’s fire stations was
not intended or implied to be a complete facility assessment (aka: an engineering / architecture
review) but rather an observation of general condition and efficiencies.
We visited both stations and found them to be clean and well maintained. It is obvious the
personnel assigned to them take pride in the appearance of their facilities. Both stations are
equipped throughout with automatic fire detection and suppression (sprinkler) systems,
emergency generators, source capture vehicle exhaust extraction systems, and have gender-
specific bathroom and sleeping facilities.
Station 61 was initially constructed more than 50 years ago when the KFD and its mission were
very different. Although the station has been remodeled and renovated twice, in 2010, and
again in 2021, for the construction of individual dormitories for employee privacy, the fire
department facilities, including administrative offices, are all located on the second floor. This
makes it difficult, if not impossible, for fire department personnel to interact with the public. In
addition, the layout does not provide direct or easy access from the second floor down to the
apparatus bays on the first floor. This can increase turnout times. It was reported to CPSM that
this station has ongoing issues with both its HVAC systems, experiences frequent breakdowns of
apparatus bay doors, and has insufficient emergency generator coverage.
Station 62, if anything, has been underutilized with KFD’s staffing challenges. It was reported to
CPSM that the boilers, HVAC system, and exterior lighting need to be replaced. Funds have
been budgeted for these projects.
§ § §
68
SECTION III. ALL-HAZARDS RISK ASSESSMENT
OF THE COMMUNITY
An all-hazards Fire and EMS risk assessment is a compressive, participatory process for assessing
hazards, vulnerabilities, and overall risks in a community. The primary purpose of a community risk
assessment is to provide data to better inform local decisions on the planning and
implementation of risk reduction measures.
A community risk program (CRR) is a process used to identify and prioritize local risks, followed by
the integrated and strategic investment of resources to reduce their occurrence and impact. 22
A CRR is a process to help communities find out what their risks are and develop a plan to
reduce the risks viewed as high priority. The steps involved in the CRR are conducting a
Community Risk Assessment (CRA), developing a CRR plan, implementing the plan, and
evaluating the plan.
The CRA is a comprehensive evaluation that identifies, prioritizes, and defines the risks that
pertain to the overall community. It is a critical first step in the CRR process and results in a full
understanding of the community's unique risks, capabilities, and characteristics. An all-hazards
approach is an integrated approach to emergency preparedness planning that focuses on
capacities and capabilities that are critical to preparedness for a full spectrum of emergencies
or disasters.
POPULATION AND COMMUNITY GROWTH
The City of Kalispel resides within Flathead County in northwest Montana, and is centrally
located between Flathead Lake, Whitefish Mountain Resort, and Glacier National Park. Kalispell
encompasses and area of is 11.72 square miles and has a population of 28,450.23 The population
density in the City of Kalispell is 1,955 per square mile.24 There has been a 15 percent increase in
population since the 2020 census and nearly a 25 percent increase since 2018 when CPSM
completed a Fire and EMS feasibility study for the city. Kalispell is expected to grow at a rate of
6.13 percent annually.25 From July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021, Kalispell added 3,681new residents, a
3.5 percent growth rate.26
The following figure illustrates Kalispell’s population increase since 1990.
22. NFPA 1300, Standards on Community Risk Assessment and Community Risk Reduction Plan
Development
23. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/kalispellcitymontana/INC110221
24. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/kalispellcitymontana/INC110221
25. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/kalispell-mt-population
26. City of Kalispell Budget Documents
69
FIGURE 3-1: Kalispell Population Increase, 1990–2022
The following maps illustrate Kalispell’s population growth since 2018 (CPSM last study period).
The map on the left describes the population per square mile in 2018. The map on the right
describes the division of municipalities into wards adopted by the city in 2021.27
FIGURE 3-2: Kalispell Population Increase Illustrated, 2018–2022
The city is divided into zones or districts, as shown on the official zoning map in the following
illustration. It also illustrates annexation boundaries. Within such districts, the city will regulate and
27. City of Kalispell Ordinance No 1869, November 2021
70
restrict the creation, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, or use of buildings, structures,
or land.
FIGURE 3-3: Kalispell Zoning Districts and Annexation Boundaries28
28. City of Kalispell GIS, February 2023
71
Kalispell is a central hub for healthcare, shopping, advanced education, kids’ sports fields, etc.
There has been an addition of a new semi-pro baseball team and stadium, Under the Big Sky
concert events, and other events that are draws to the Kalispell areas.29 Moreover, with its close
proximity to Yellowstone and Glacier national parks (3.9 million visitors30 and 2.9 million31 visitors,
respectively), Kalispell is a thriving tourist destination. It is estimated that 1.9 million visitors spent at
least one night in Kalispell during 2022 and stayed on
average five nights within the state.32 This is a notable 136
percent increase in transient visitors since the 2018 study,
when the visitor population was estimated at 803,000. It
should be noted that transient visitor increase anomalies
included the COVID pandemic, which at first lowered the
number of visitors, then expanded the number of visitors
greatly when pandemic restrictions were eased. The very
popular TV show Yellowstone is said to have significantly
increased the tourist traffic to the parks.33 During peak
seasons, tourist head to the historic downtown Kalispell area, which offers a wide variety of small
retail shops and eateries. Conrad Mansion Museum and Hockaday Museum of Art are popular in
Kalispell as are historical landmarks including the Carnegie Library, Masonic Temple, Calbick
Block, and the Adams Building.
Kalispell’s peak tourist season is June through September, with the fall, winter, and spring
visitations spread out fairly evenly. Lodging properties in Kalispell include 23 hotels with 1,938
rooms.34 Short-term rentals (STRs) such as Airbnb and VRBO are increasing along with traditional
lodging. As of February 2022, about 260 STRs were active in Kalispell city limits, a 54.8 percent
increase since 2021. Kalispell STR activity during the peak summer months shows an average
occupancy rate of 86 percent.35
As stated above, Yellowstone National Park has about 4 million visitors a year. Using Yellowstone
Park entrance data (“average number of visits”),36 CPSM determined the percent of visitors to
the park per season. (Similar comparison was done with Glacier Park data.)37 Not surprisingly,
about 80 percent of the visitors are in the summer months (June through September), 12 percent
of the visitors are in the spring, six percent in the fall, and two percent in the winter. The following
figures illustrate the seasonal influx of the tourist population in Kalispell.
29. Fire Chief.
30. https://www.statista.com/statistics/254231/number-of-visitors-to-the-yellowstone-national-park-in-the-us/
31. https://www.statista.com/statistics/253875/number-of-visitors-to-us-glacier-national-park/
32. Dana Medler, Executive Director, Discover Kalispell.
33. UM, Bureau of Business and Economic Research (Paramount’s ‘Yellowstone’ generates 2.1 M visitors)
34. Kalispell Chamber of Commerce.
35. https://kalispellchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/discover-kalispell-fy23-marketing-plan.pdf
36. https://www.statista.com/statistics/254231/number-of-visitors-to-the-yellowstone-national-park-in-the-us/
37. https://www.statista.com/statistics/253875/number-of-visitors-to-us-glacier-national-park/
72
FIGURE 3-4: Kalispell Population Influx by Seasons
In terms of fire and EMS risk, the age and socio-economic profiles of a population can have an
impact on the number of requests for fire and EMS services. Evaluation of the number of seniors
and children by fire management zones can provide insight into trends in service delivery and
quantitate the probability of future service requests. In a 2021 National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) report on residential fires, the following key findings were identified for the
period 2015–2019:38
■ Males were more likely to be killed or injured in home fires than females and accounted for
larger percentages of victims (57 percent of deaths and 55 percent of injuries).
■ The largest number of deaths (19 percent) in a single age group was among people ages
55 to 65.
■ 59 percent of the victims in fatal fires were between the ages of 39 and 74, and three of five
(62 percent) of the non-fatal injured were between the ages of 25 and 64.
■ Slightly over one-third (36 percent) of the fatalities were age 65 and older; only 17 percent of
the non-fatality injured were in that age group.
■ Children under the age of 15 accounted for 11 percent of the home fire fatalities and
10 percent of the injuries.
■ Children under the age of 5 accounted for 5 percent of the deaths and 4 percent of the
injuries.
■ Adults of all ages had a higher rate of non-fatal fire injuries than children.
■ Smoking materials were the leading cause of home fire death overall (23 percent) with
cooking ranking a close second (20 percent).
38. M. Ahrens, R. Maheshwari, “Home Fire Victims by Age and Gender” (Quincy, MA: NFPA 2021
73
■ The highest percent of fire fatalities occurred while the person was asleep or physically
disabled and not in the area of the fire origin, key factors to vulnerable populations.
In the City of Kalispell, the following age and socioeconomic factors are considered herein
when assessing and determining risk for fire and EMS preparedness and response,
notwithstanding tourism impacts:
■ Children under the age of five represent 7.7 percent of the population.
■ Persons under the age of 18 represent 24.4 percent of the population.
■ Persons over the age of 65 represent 17 percent of the population.
■ Female persons represent 51.4 percent of the population.
■ There are 2.45 people per household.
■ The median household income in 2020 dollars was $55,411.
■ Those living in property make up 10.85 percent of the population.
Demographically, Kalispell has an older population—17 percent of the total population is over 65
years of age, a factor that likely generates numerous several EMS calls, many of which are
covered under Medicare/Medicaid.39 Older individuals are at a higher likelihood of having
pre-existing medical conditions or limited mobility, which can also diminish their capacity to
effectively respond to natural disasters.
Black or African American alone represents 1.1 percent of the population. The remaining
percentage of population by race includes White alone at 90.2 percent, American Indian or
Alaska Native alone at 1.1 percent, Asian alone at 1.5 percent, two or more races at 4.5
percent, and Hispanic or Latino at 4.1 percent.
The average household income in Kalispell is $55,411 and a poverty rate of 10.85 percent.40
There is often a connection between poverty and elevated fire risk (and use of the EMS systems).
Factors associated with poverty and elevated fire risk include family stability, crowdedness, the
percentage of owner-occupied homes, older housing, the proportion of vacant houses, and the
ability to speak English.41 Successful programs to reduce fire incident rates have been
introduced in high-poverty areas. A significant impact on KFD calls for service (fire and EMS) has
been an increase in homeless population relocating to Kalispell.42 Kalispell has about 234
homeless persons in the city, which is about 20 percent of Montana's 1,406 homeless persons. 43 44
There is a considerable number of current and planned development projects in the City of
Kalispell. The following table shows building permits issued since CPSM’s last study (all permits).
39. Fire Chief.
40. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/kalispellcitymontana/INC110221#INC110221
41. https://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/News and Research/Fire statistics and reports/US Fire
Problem/poverty.pdf
42. Fire Chief.
43. https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/
44. https://dailyinterlake.com/news/2023/feb/03/non-profit-orgs-conduct-annual-homeless-survey/
74
TABLE 3-1: City of Kalispell Building Permits, 2012–202245
Type of Building
Permit Issued 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Commercial,
Office, Industrial 42 67 79 75 126 79 80 67 58 67 39
Residential 113 164 156 163 173 180 181 210 340 221 149
Public and
Government 10 15 13 16 3 10 12 3 4 9 9
Heath Care 13 11 21 22 21 21 7 1 4 3 3
Total 178 257 270 276 323 290 290 281 406 300 200
Note: Gray indicates previous CPSM review period. Blue indicates more recent data.
FIGURE 3-5: Residential Development (Left) and Commercial, industrial,
Healthcare, and Government Development (Right), 2012–2018
The following table shows a steady number of significant commercial projects and added
square footage since CPSM’s last study.
45. 2022 Construction, Subdivision and Annexation Report, City of Kalispell
75
TABLE 3-2: City of Kalispell Retail, Commercial, and Industrial Projects, 2018–
202246
Commercial Project Description Square Footage
4th and Zuri
55 4th Ave. W N,
Mixed Use (remodel) 13,149
Black Kaiju
313 2nd Ave. W
Retail 5,710
Chipotle
2264 US-93
Restaurant 2,325
CHS Grain Elevator
700 Rial Park Rd.
Industrial / Agriculture 2,000
CHS Fuel Station
700 Rail Park Dr.
Fuel Bays N/A
CHS Storage
700 Rail Park Dr.
Storage 17,428
CHS Warehouse
700 Rail Park Dr.
Storage 25,000
Clarks North Hanger
1000 Ryan Lane
Airport / Airplane
Hanger
7,500
Clarks South Hanger
30 Ryan Lane
Airport / Airplane
Hanger
9,480
Dee O Gee
635 Treeline Rd., Ste. 2
Retail 4,100
FedEx
165 Schoolhouse Loop
Shipping Facility
(Trailer)
1,410
Grease Monkey
665 Treeline Rd.
Auto Service 3,144
Kohl’s
2248 US-93
Retail 39,181
My Place
755 Treeline Rd.
Hotel 37,529
NW Drywall
1105 Oregon Ave.
Industrial 29,800
Old Navy
2250 US-93
Retail 12,573
Panera Bread
2240 US-93
Restaurant 4,877
REI
2270 US-93
Retail 20,264
Sherwin Williams
52 1st Ave.
Retail 3,999
Skalsky Hanger
90 Ryan Lane
Airport / Airplane
Hanger
9,480
46. 2022 Construction, Subdivision and Annexation Report, City of Kalispell
76
Commercial Project Description Square Footage
Skips Hanger
20 Ryan Lane
Airport / Airplane
Hanger
13,650
Spring Prairie Shops
2495 US-93
Retail 7,188 (2018)
4,524 (2019)
Sunrift Pub House
55 1st Ave. W N
Restaurant (remodel) 3,858
Taco Bell
535 E. Idaho St.
Restaurant 2,101
Town Pump
445 W. Idaho St.
Tavern / Casino 17,440
Treeline Center (5)
625 Treeline Rd.
Retail 6,155
Treeline Retail Center
635 Treeline Rd.
7,000
UPS
1151 N. Meridian Rd.
Shipping Facility
(expanded)
52,85
World Gym
555 E Swift Creek Way
Retail / Gym 17,500
§ § §
77
FIGURE 3-6: Map of City of Kalispell Retail, Commercial, and Industrial Projects,
2018–2022
The following table shows a steady number of residential projects since CPSM’s last study, as well
as projects in progress.
§ § §
78
TABLE 3-3: City of Kalispell Residential Projects Completed or In Progress, 2018–
202247
Residential Project and Subdivisions Description
Stillwater Village
1051 Savannah Rd.
314 Apartments
Northland Subdivision
Hwy 93 / Northland Dr.
100 SFD Subdivision
Silver Brook Apartments
150 Lily Dr.
229 Apartments
Owl View Landing
201, 202, 205 206, 207 Sawyer Lane
40 Apartment Style Condominiums
Junegrass Place
North Meridian Rd.
138 Apartments
The Silos
Fifth Avenue West
200 Apartments, Four Stories with Roof-top
Restaurant
Stillwater Crossings
1041 Savannah Rd.
Apartments
Meridian Court Apartments
1 Meridian Court
Apartments
Mountain View Subdivision
Foys Lake Rd.
407 Single Family Dwelling Subdivision
Meadows Edge Subdivision
1120 Farm Rd.
Jaxon Ridge
702 S. Woodland Dr.
24 SFD Single Family Dwelling Subdivision
Creekside Samaritan House
124 9th Avenue West
Homeless Shelter
Commons (Gateway Mall)
110 Financial Drive / Highway 2 West
42 Apartments (residence 55+)
Hayden Tanner
Fourth Avenue
80 Mixed occupancies (Apartments and
Townhomes with Restaurant and Retail
Space)
KM Building Refurbish
Third Street West and Main Street
Five-story, 79-Room, 86,000 Square-Foot
Boutique Hotel with Roof-Top Bar
§ § §
47. 2022 Construction, Subdivision and Annexation Report, City of Kalispell
79
FIGURE 3-7: Map of City of Kalispell Residential Projects Completed or In
Progress, 2018–2022
Opportunity Zones are intended to encourage long-term private investment in low-income
communities. Opportunity Zones provide a federal tax incentive for taxpayers who reinvest
unrealized capital gains into “Opportunity Funds,” which are vehicles dedicated to investing in
low-income areas called “Opportunity Zones.”48 The State of Montana has 25 designated
Opportunity Zones in 25 low-income areas. Kalispell has one area dedicated to Opportunity
Zoning, as shown in the following figure.
48. https://www.kalispell.com/615/Community-Development
80
FIGURE 3-8: City of Kalispell “Opportunity Zone”
The City of Kalispell is a prime location for recreational activities that attract millions of visitors
each year to the region.49 Therefore, the most common employment sectors in Kalispell are retail
trade (2,137 people), healthcare & social assistance (2,053 people), and hospitality (1,060
people).50 The following table illustrates Kalispell’s largest employers.
TABLE 3-4: Largest Employers in Kalispell51
Employer Number of
Employees
Logan Medical Center > 1000
Weyerhaeuser 500 to 999
Health Center Northwest
Applied Materials
Teletech
Glacier Bank
Whitefish Mountain Resort
Super 1 Foods
Walmart
Logan Health
250 to 499
49. https://kalispellchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2018-annual-report_final.pdf
50. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/kalispell-mt/
51. City of Kalispell 2019 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
81
What this data tells us: The large infusion of visitor population, combined with significant growth,
combined with an aging population are all of significant relevance to Kalispell’s emergency
services.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
The City of Kalispell is prone to and will continue to be exposed to certain environmental hazards
that may impact the community. Identifying and assessing impacts of local hazards in a
community is important; agencies can participate in county-wide and state-wide mitigation
efforts and prepare local communities for disasters (all-risk).
The natural, manmade, and technological hazards are currently being evaluated in the 2023
Montana Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP).52 In the western region of the state (Flathead County /
Kalispell area), wildland fires, severe weather, flooding, earthquakes, drought, haz-mat, disease,
landslide/avalanches, dam failures, terrorism, violence, civil unrest, cyber security, and volcanic
ash are identified as potential hazards.
The following table places these environmental factors in order of probability; these factors are
then discussed in greater detail.
TABLE 3-5: Potential Environmental Factors for Kalispell53
Environmental Factor Geographical
Area Potential / Severity Probability
Wildland Fire Extensive Critical Highly Likely
Severe Weather Extensive Limited Highly Likely
Flooding Significant Critical Likely
Earthquake Significant Limited Likely
Drought Extensive Critical Likely
Haz-Mat Limited Limited Likely
Disease Extensive Critical Occasional
Landslides / Avalanches Limited Negligible Occasional
Dam Failures Limited Critical Occasional
Terrorism, Violence, Civil
Unrest, Cyber Security Significant Critical Occasional
Volcanic Ash Extensive Limited Unlikely
Wildland and Rangeland Fires
A wildland or rangeland fire is defined as any fire occurring on grassland or forestland, regardless
of ignition sources. Three factors influence wildland fire behavior: weather, topography, and fuel.
These components can increase the likelihood of a fire starting, its intensity, the speed and
direction in which it travels, and the ability to control and extinguish it. Quantitatively, the wildfire
hazard is measured by two main factors: 1) burn probability (or likelihood of burning), and 2) fire
intensity (measured as flame length, fire line intensity, or other similar measures). Longer fire
seasons caused by changing climate, lower precipitation, and reduced snowpack are
52. Montana Hazard Mitigation Plan (2023).
53. https://des.mt.gov/Mitigation/DRAFT_2023_MT_MHMP-20230522-11.pdf
82
contributing to the increased level of fire activity in Montana. Anthropogenic and forest health
are also major issues which increase fire probability and intensity.
FIGURE 3-9: Wildland Fire Probability, State of Montana
Many rural areas of Flathead County are located within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI).
A WUI is defined as a zone of transition between unoccupied land and human development. It
is the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle
with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels.54 Any development that occurs outside city limits
would therefore be within the WUI.55 While the city is in an urban setting, fire embers play a large
role in spreading wildfires because they easily become airborne. During a large fire with strong
winds, embers can start spot fires several miles away from the fire front. The following figure
shows WUI influence specific to Flathead County and the City of Kalispell.
§ § §
54. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/what-is-the-wui.html
55. Flathead County Office of Emergency Services.
83
FIGURE 3-10: WUI Influence, Flathead County / Kalispell
Severe Weather, Flooding, Drought, Landslides, Avalanches
Severe winter weather typically causes drifting snow, road closures, trees falling into power lines,
widespread power outages, increased motor vehicle accidents, and possible school closures.
Cold waves cover parts of Montana on average 6 to 12 times a winter with temperatures well
below zero accompanied by strong winds with blowing snow. Large accumulations of snow are
also possible, increasing the risk of trees and/or branches falling onto roads, falling on vehicles
and buildings, and impacting public utility lines. High wind events with debris covering roadways
and power outages impact the ability of the public to travel. Travel is impacted by heavy rain
and the risk of flooded roadways; air travel is impacted by high winds and or lightning.
Significant flooding can cause damage to infrastructure within inundated areas. Duration of
flooding also plays a major role in flooding impacts, often ranging from a few hours to many
days. Flathead County experiences high water events almost yearly.
While much of the state is entering the third year of drought, conditions dramatically improved
from one year ago as the state experienced higher than average rain and snowpack season.
84
Still, drought conditions in the state of Montana are a common climate event.56 Floods are the
result of a multitude of naturally occurring and human-induced factors, but they all can be
defined as the accumulation of too much water in too little time in a specific area. Types of
floods that affect Montana include regional floods, flash floods, dam failure, and ice-jam floods.
Earthquake
A belt of seismicity known as the Intermountain Seismic Belt extends through western Montana,
from the Flathead Lake region in the northwest corner of the State to Yellowstone National Park
and continues southward through Yellowstone Park.57 This seismic source zone includes the City
of Kalispell as well as the Cities of Missoula, Helena, Bozeman, and Livingston (all of which are
rapidly growing communities). The following table illustrates magnitude 3.0 and above
earthquake activity within the last eight years in close proximity to the City of Kalispell.
TABLE 3-6: Seismic Activity in Close Proximity to Kalispell
Date Location Magnitude
4/11/2014 Somer Bay 3.6
11/11/2014 SE Happy’s Inn 3.7
12/1/2014 SE Happy’s Inn 3.5
4/11/2015 Haskill Basin 3.5
11/15/2015 Haskill Basin 3.9
9/14/2017 NNE Olney 3.0
1/22/2018 Bigfork 3.0
4/10/2018 SSW Stryker 3.3
1/2/2021 ENE Stryker 3.2
Montana’s historical earthquakes demonstrated their destructive effects, which include
landslides, liquefaction resulting in uneven ground settling, flooding, and damage to homes and
public buildings, dams, irrigation systems, the power grid, communications systems, and
transportation systems. Seasonal tourism increases exposure to seismic hazards in all areas, but
the greatest exposure is in the Yellowstone National Park-Hebgen Lake region, where several
million people visit annually. The following figure shows regional earthquakes in the past 41 years
of up to 5.0 magnitude and earthquakes above 5.0 magnitude in the past 125 year.
§ § §
56. https://www.drought.gov/states/montana#drought
57. https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70029992
85
FIGURE 3-11: Historical Regional Earthquakes
Hazardous Material Incident
The most likely locations for larger hazardous material incidents are along Montana’s highways,
railroads, and pipelines. Hazardous materials from fixed facilities and transportation incidents
pose possible threats within the city. Locations within Kalispell that report hazardous materials
include:58
■ CHS, 700 Rial Park Drive.
■ City Services, 640 West Montana Street.
■ UPS, 1151 North Meridian Road.
■ FedEx, 2425 Highway 93 South.
■ FedEx, 164 School House Loop.
■ Car Quest, 535 West Idaho Street.
■ American Welding, 515 West Idaho Street.
■ Batteries Plus, 215 Wet Idaho Street.
■ J2 Office, 700 Sunset Boulevard.
■ Logan Health, 310 Sunnyview Lane.
■ Logan Medical Supply, 53 3rd Street.
■ Kalispel City, 45 North Woodland Park Drive.
The Kalispell Regional Hazmat Team, a State of Montana resource, was established to assist local
jurisdictions with hazardous materials incidents.
58. Fire Chief’s Report.
86
To respond to hazardous materials incidents, the Montana Department of Military Affairs’ Disaster
and Emergency Services Division maintains six state-wide hazardous materials incident response
teams (SHMIRTs). The Kalispell Regional Hazmat Team was established to assist local jurisdictions
with hazardous materials incidents. The team’s response area borders Canada to the north,
Idaho to the west, Missoula’s Regional Team to the South, and Great Falls’ Regional Team to the
East. The team is staffed by Kalispell Fire Department personnel trained to the Hazmat Technician
level; their equipment is housed and available from Kalispell Fire Department Station 61.59
Disease
The population of Montana increased from 1.06 million in 2018 to 1.1 million in 2020 [U.S. Census,
2020]. Most of the population growth has occurred within the Western Mountain region around
the larger cities of Kalispell, Bozeman, and Missoula. The increased population in this area of the
state can increase the human-to-human exposure to disease.
Pandemics are large-scale outbreaks of infectious disease that can greatly increase morbidity
and mortality over a wide geographic area and cause significant economic, social, and
political disruption. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a contagious disease caused by a virus,
the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The first known case was
identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, then spreading worldwide and leading to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The international community has made progress toward preparing for and
mitigating the impacts of pandemics. However, despite these improvements, significant gaps
and challenges exist in global pandemic preparedness. Pandemics can cause economic
damage through multiple channels, including short-term fiscal shocks and longer-term negative
shocks to economic growth.
Dam Failure
Dam failures are not a frequent occurrence but when they do occur, they can cause large-
scale damage. The greatest threat from dam failure is to people and property in areas
immediately downstream from the dam. There are 14 dams in Flathead County, three in
proximity to Kalispell (within 14 miles): Skyles Lake Dam (9.38 miles), Jessup Mill Pond (9.46 miles),
and Ashley Lake (14.29 miles).60
§ § §
59. https://dailyinterlake.com/news/2018/jan/31/cuts-hit-hazmat-response-teams-6/
60. https://www.anyplaceamerica.com/directory/mt/flathead-county-30029/dams/
87
FIGURE 3-12: Hungry Horse Dam (Approximately 9.38 Miles From Kalispell)
Civil Unrest, Cyber Security, Terrorism, Violence, Mass Shootings
Over the last few decades, many cities have been affected by civil unrest and rioting. Often, this
develops from protests of political, social, economic, environmental or law enforcement issues.
Often, peaceful protests can escalate into a violent and dangerous situation. Communities face
increased risks during periods of public protests and social unrest, which can threaten civilians,
cause disruption to businesses, and damage both private and public property.61
Cybercriminals target a computer network or a networked device to gain information or breach
confidential information. Most cybercrime is committed by cybercriminals or hackers who want
to make money. However, occasionally the aim of cybercrime is to damage computers or
networks for reasons other than profit, or as a result of the hack. Due to our reliance on
computers and data networks, a cyberattack can be very debilitating and cause damage to
local government productivity and infrastructure.
National Security Threats / Terrorism: On September 11, 2001, 19 militants associated with the
Islamic extremist group al Qaeda hijacked four airplanes and carried out suicide attacks against
targets in the United States. Almost 3,000 people were killed during the 9/11 terrorist attacks and
there were billions of dollars in destruction to public and government infrastructure. National
security is the ability of a country’s government to protect its citizens, economy, and other
institutions. National security encompasses national defense, foreign intelligence and
counterintelligence, international and internal security, and foreign relations. This includes
countering terrorism; combating espionage and economic espionage conducted for the
benefit of any foreign government. This also includes cyber threats that are perpetrated by
nation states, terrorists, or their agents or proxies.62
Gun Violence / Mass Shootings / Domestic Violence (Mass Casualty) Incidents: Since 2009, there
have been 279 mass shootings in the United States, resulting in 1,576 people killed and 1,046
61. https://theconversation.com/us/topics/civil-unrest-78423
62. US Department of Justice.
88
people wounded.63 In nearly all mass shootings over this period, the shooter was an adult man
who acted alone.64 There is no specific pattern to mass shootings; they accrue in small rural
settings, metropolitan cities, movie theaters, schools, and shopping malls. The destructive reach
of a mass shooting stretches far beyond those killed and wounded, damaging the well-being of
survivors, their families, and communities. Studies of survivors from various mass shootings
consistently find that mass shootings harm the mental health of both direct survivors and
community members, including psychological symptoms such as post-traumatic stress and
depression.65
Civil Unrest (Mass Casualty) Incidents: Over the last few decades, many cities have been
affected by civil unrest and rioting. Often, this develops from protests of political, social,
economic, environmental or law enforcement issues. Peaceful protests can escalate into a
violent and dangerous situation. Communities face increased risks during periods of public
protests and social unrest, which can threaten civilians, cause disruption to businesses, and
damage both private and public property.66
Landslides
A landslide is the mass movement of rock, soil, and debris down a slope due to gravity. It occurs
when the driving force is greater than the resisting force. It is a natural process that occurs on
steep slopes. The movement may range from very slow to rapid. It can affect areas both near
and far from the source. Slower movement can also cause severe problems in developing
areas. The effects of the very slow movements can be seen along many roadways in the form of
leaning trees, misaligned fences and walls, and damaged road surfaces, foundations, and
structure
Volcanic Ash
Although the probability is minimal, there is the potential for a catastrophic volcanic eruption in
the vicinity of Yellowstone National Park that would have very serious consequences for
Montana and neighboring states. The probability of volcanic eruption hazard is ranked as
“Unlikely,” with less than one event per 100 years. The primary effect of volcanic eruptions in
Montana would be ash fall. Ash fall, because of its potential widespread distribution, offers some
significant volcanic hazards. Volcanic ash can cause failure of electronic components, interrupt
telephone and radio communications, and cause internal combustion engines to stall.
§ § §
63. https://www.everytown.org/issues/mass-shootings/
64. https://everytownresearch.org/maps/mass-shootings-in-america/
65. Sarah R. Lowe and Sandro Galea, “The Mental Health Consequences of Mass Shootings.”
66. https://theconversation.com/us/topics/civil-unrest-78423
89
FIGURE 3-13: Distribution of Ash Fall From Historic Volcanic Eruptions
Airborne particles of volcanic ash can pose a health risk to people with respiratory conditions.
Volcanic eruptions are generally not a major concern in Montana due to the relatively low
probability (compared with other hazards) of events in any given year. However, Montana is
within a region with a significant component of volcanic activity and has experienced the
effects of volcanic activity as recently as 1980 when Mount St. Helens erupted in Washington
state.
BUILDING AND TARGET HAZARD FACTORS
Building and target hazards are defined as significant hazards that can strain the fire
department response capability—a plausible scenario in which a fire department could quickly
become overwhelmed and for which additional resources would be needed to mitigate the
incident. The definition of target hazards varies among jurisdictions but typically covers hospitals,
nursing facilities, schools, churches, storage facilities, military sites, high-rise, multi-family dwellings,
assemblies, and industrial parks / manufacturing plants.
Target hazards are often segregated by high, medium, or low hazard depending on factors
such as the life and building content hazard, and the potential fire flow and staffing required to
mitigate an emergency in the specific property. According to the NFPA Fire Protection
Handbook, these hazards are defined as:
High-hazard occupancies: Schools, hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living, explosives plants,
refineries, high-rise buildings, and other high life-hazard (vulnerable population) or large fire-
potential occupancies.
Medium-hazard occupancies: Apartments, offices, and mercantile and industrial occupancies
not normally requiring extensive rescue by firefighting forces.
Low-hazard occupancies: One-, two-, or three-family dwellings and scattered small business and
industrial occupancies.
Identifying high-hazard occupancies or target hazards that would require a higher
concentration of fire department resources is an essential part of fire risk assessment. The process
90
of identifying target hazards and pre-incident planning are basic preparedness efforts that have
been key functions in the fire service for many years. In this process, critical structures are
identified based on the risk they pose. Then, tactical considerations are established for fires or
other emergencies in these structures. Consideration is given to the activities that take place
(manufacturing, processing, etc.), the number and types of occupants (elderly, youth,
handicapped, imprisoned, etc.), and other specific aspects relating to the construction of the
facility, or any hazardous materials that are regularly found in the building.
Target hazards are those occupancies or structures that are unusually dangerous when
considering the potential for loss of life or the potential for property damage. Typically, these
occupancies include hospitals, nursing homes, and high-rise and other large structures.
The City of Kalispell has roughly 13,000 units (residential, commercial, industrial, mercantile) in the
city:67
■ Total Housing Units: 10,078.68
■ Historic Mixed / Historical Buildings: no count provided to CPSM.
■ Within the City of Kalispell is the Main Street Historic District, a two-block concentration of
historic mixed-occupancy buildings. These buildings are largely two to four stories, older
unprotected construction, with zero lot lines, and limited area separations. Fire can be one of
the greatest threats to heritage buildings as they lack modern building features such as area
separation, and fire notification and suppression systems. Their proximity (zero separation)
promotes building-to-building fire spread.
■ Assisted Living / Nursing Homes: 18+.
■ Assembly: 2.
■ Commercial and industrial buildings: no count provided to CPSM.
■ Schools: 15.
■ Hospitals: 1.
Logan Health (formerly Kalispell Regional Medical Center) is a 622-bed non-profit, tertiary,
research and academic medical center located on a 50-acre campus complex with 52 various
offices, clinics, and outpatient services It is locates about a mile north of downtown Kalispell.
§ § §
67. City of Kalispell Planning Dept.
68. https://datacommons.org
91
FIGURE 3-14: Logan Health Campus
An identified high hazard for Kalispell is the number of high- to mid-occupancy buildings that do
not have sprinklers. Specific information about these buildings is shown in the following table.
§ § §
92
TABLE 3-7: Sprinkler Status of High- to Mid-occupancy Buildings (2018)
Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered
1018 8th St W Apartment 1018 8th St W No Aero Inn Hotel/motel 1830 Highway 93 S No
1120 Kenway Dr Apartment 1120 Kenway Dr No Americas Best
Value
Hotel/motel 1550 Highway 93 N No
1122 Kenway Dr Apartment 1122 Kenway Dr No Blue and White
Motel
Hotel/motel 640 e Idaho St No
1124 Kenway Dr Apartment 1124 Kenway Dr No Vacationer Motel Hotel/motel 285 7th Ave EN No
1126 Kenway Dr Apartment 1126 Kenway Dr No Travel Lodge Inn Hotel/motel 350 N Main St No
1128 Kenway Dr Apartment 1128 Kenway Dr No Super 8 Motel Hotel/motel 1341 1 St Ave E No
1030 8th St W Apartment 1030 8th St W No Comfort Inn Hotel/motel 1330 Highway 2 W No
1032 8th St W Apartment 1032 8th St W No Motel 6 Hotel/motel 1540 Highway 93 S No
716 1St Ave W Apartment 746 1St Ave E No Kalispell Hilltop
Inn
Hotel/motel 801 E Idaho St No
Big Sky Manor Apartment 110 2nd Ave W No Kalispell Grand
Hotel
Hotel/motel 100 S Main St No
Westgate Senior Apartment 516 Corporate Dr No Flathead County
Library
Assembly 233 1St Ave E Partial
Cherry Orchard Apartment 700 Liberty St No
Rosebriar Inn Apartment 24 1St Ave W No Flathead High
School
Educational 644 4th Ave W Partial
Glacier Manor Apartment 506 1St Ave W No Buffalo Hills
Terrace
Apartment 40 Claremont St Yes
Gate Way Village Apartment 308 Two Mile Dr No
Bethlehem
Lutheran
Assembly 603 S Main St No
Trinity Day Care Educational 486 3Rd Ave W No Center Court Apartment 121 2nd Ave W Yes
Trinity Day Care Educational 373 W Washington
St
No Samaritan House Apartment 124 9th Ave W Yes
St. Matthews Educational 602 S Main St No Fernwell
Apartments
Apartment 20 4th Ave W Yes
School District 5 Educational 233 1St Ave E No Eastside Brick Apartment 723 5th Ave E Yes
93
Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered
Russel Elementary Educational 227 W Nevada St No Signature
Theaters
Assembly 185 Hutton Ranch
Rd
Yes
Peterson
Elementary
Educational 1119 2nd St W No Flathead County
Detention Ctr.
Detention /
corrections
920 S Main St Yes
Linderman
Education
Educational 124 3Rd Ave E No North West Health Educational 79 7th Ave EN Yes
Kalispell Middle
School
Educational 205 Northwest Ln No Glacier High
School
Educational 375 Wolfpack Way Yes
Hedges
Elementary
Educational 826 4th Ave E No FVCC Educational 777 Grandview Dr Yes
Gift of Love Child
Care
Educational 602 S Main St No Adult Mental
Health
Group home 410 Windward Way Yes
Elrod Elementary Educational 412 3Rd Ave W No Willow Glen
Group
Group home 1600 Woodland
Ave
Yes
Edgerton
Elementary
Educational 1400 Whitefish
Stage Rd
No Sinopah House Group home 420 Windward Way Yes
Agape Home
Care
Group home 40 Appleway Dr No Safe House Adult Group home 412 Windward Way Yes
Discovery Group home 75 Glenwood Dr No North West Health Health 66 Claremont Yes
Renaissance
Assisted Living
Group home 645 Liberty St A No Med North Urgent
Care
Health 2316 Highway 93 N Yes
Lone Pine Lodge Group home 1300 8th St W No Kalispell Regional Health 310 Sunnyview Ln Yes
Hope Pregnancy
Center
Group home 940 1St Ave E No HCNW Rehab
(Floor 2)
Health 320 Sunnyview Ln Yes
Friendship House Group home 606 2nd Ave W No Wel Life Hospital/
nursing
156 Three Mile Dr Yes
Flathead Youth
Home
Group home 825 E Oregon St No Brendan House Hospital/
nursing
350 Conway Dr Yes
Flathead
Industries
Group home 21 4th Ave W No Prestige Assisted
Living
Hospital/
nursing
125 Glenwood Dr Yes
Flathead
Industries
Group Home 2329 Merganser Dr No Immanuel
Lutheran
Hospital/
nursing
185 Crestline Rd Yes
94
Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered Building Name Building
Purpose Location Sprinklered
Flathead
Industries
Group Home 2327 Merganser Dr No Heritage Place Hospital/
nursing
171 Heritage Way Yes
Flathead
Industries
Group Home 1212 6th Ave W No Red Lion Hotel Hotel/motel 20 N Main St Yes
Flathead
Industries
Group Home 1214 6th Ave W No Holiday Inn
Express
Hotel/motel 275 Treeline Rd Yes
Flathead
Industries
Group Home 110 3Rd Ave W No Hilton Garden Inn Hotel/motel 1840 Highway 93 S Yes
Woodland Clinic Health 705 6th Ave E No Hampton Inn Hotel/motel 1120 Highway 2 W Yes
Thurston
Orthodontics
Health 125 Commons Way No EconoLodge Hotel/motel 1680 Highway 93 S Yes
The Sleep
Medicine
Health 200 Commons Way No Fairbridge Inn Hotel/motel 1701 Highway 93 S Yes*
Potthoff Dentistry
Suite
Health 195 Commons
Loop
No
Pathways Health 200 Heritage Way No
Montana Woman Health 1103 S Main St No
Glacier Prostetic Health 985 N Meridian Rd No
Glacier Dental
Clinic
Health 1340 Airport Rd No
Note: *Frequently broken or inoperable.
Other: CHS Railway Center with multiple grain silos, fertilizer storage, chemicals, storage, fuel station, 700 Rail Park Drive.
95
The following figure illustrates the location of target hazards in the city.
FIGURE 3-15: Target Hazards (all)
In terms of identifying target hazards, consideration must be given to the activities that take
place (public assembly, life safety vulnerability, manufacturing, processing, etc.), the number
96
and types of occupants (elderly, youth, special needs, etc.), and other specific aspects related
to the construction of the structure. Incidents in assisted living facilities, nursing homes, and
hospitals, as examples, can tax a fire department’s resource and are considered high hazard
targets. Rescue in these facilities can be difficult.
The City of Kalispell has a variety of target hazards:
High Hazards
■ Assisted living/nursing facilities (12).
■ Educational facilities (12).
■ Hospitals (multibuilding, 50-acre campus facility).
■ Assemblies (4).
Low to Medium Hazards
■ Residential over commercial buildings (mixed use).
■ Mixed Use/Historical Buildings.
■ Commercial and industrial sites (large mercantile, for example).
■ One-, two-, or three-family dwellings and multifamily apartments (due to the number of them).
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials from fixed facilities and transportation incidents pose possible threats. In
Flathead County, these hazards include petroleum products and agricultural chemicals.
Locations within Kalispell that report hazardous materials include:69
■ CHS, 700 Rail Park Drive.
■ City Services, 640 West Montana Street.
■ UPS, 1151 North Meridian Road.
■ FedEx, 2425 Highway 93 South.
■ FedEx, 164 School House Loop.
■ Car Quest, 535 West Idaho Street.
■ American Welding, 515 West Idaho Street.
■ Batteries Plus, 215 Wet Idaho Street.
■ J2 Office, 700 Sunset Boulevard.
■ Logan Health, 310 Sunnyview Lane.
■ Logan Medical Supply, 53 3rd Street.
■ Kalispel City, 45 North Woodland Park Drive.
69. Fire Chief’s Report.
97
Summary and Observations:
■ The greatest building risks in the City of Kalispell are of a low-to-moderate hazard (single-family
dwellings, predominantly lightweight, wood-frame construction, and mixed use / historical
buildings in the downtown).
■ The city has high-risk/vulnerable population risks (nursing/assisted living facilities, schools, and
multifamily residential structures apartments/condominiums).
■ The city also has multiple residential projects under construction or approved and planned for
near- to mid-term construction.
■ The industrial and mercantile building risk, while a lower life safety risk, is generally a moderate
to higher hazard risk and based on processes, storage, and overall occupancy type. All the
high-hazard risk locations pose either a difficulty for KFD to conduct evacuations and/or fire
attack. The KFD, as with most fire departments, utilizes a quick and aggressive fire attack to
contain a conflagration to the room of origin. However, a significant commercial or a large
complex fire and/or a multiple occupancy evacuation will quickly exhaust both the KFD and
mutual aid partner resources.
■ Robust public education and fire inspections / pre-fire planning, specifically in the downtown
historical districts, remain an important endeavor for the KFD. See the operations and fire
prevention sections.
TRANSPORTATION FACTORS
The existing public street network within the city limits consists primarily of city-maintained
roadways. According to the city’s Growth Policy (July 2017), the street network totals
approximately 120 miles of roadway within the city. Roads by functional type in Kalispell include:
■ Arterial streets, which provide high-speed/high-capacity movement of traffic and are
accessed from collector and local streets.
■ Collector streets, which are medium speed and volume roads and provide access within and
between neighborhoods.
■ Connector streets, which are low-speed, low-volume roads within and between
neighborhoods, which also have access to collector and arterial roads.
■ Local streets, which are low-speed, low-volume roads that provide direct access to residential
and commercial areas.
The following figure illustrates the principal road network for the City of Kalispell.
98
FIGURE 3-16: Principal Road Network for the City of Kalispell
Overall traffic volumes in Kalispell are forecast to continue to increase. The road and
transportation network described herein poses the following risks:70
■ Some areas lack a gridded, interconnected street system, which limits route options for local
residents and business, and concentrates traffic onto one or two access roads.
■ At times, traffic volumes overwhelm the capacity of traffic control devices to adequately
maintain system performance.
■ Pedestrian safety issues are especially problematic as the further one travels from the core of
the community, especially in the older and middle-aged neighborhoods, due to the almost
total lack of sidewalks, bike lanes, and multi-use trails.
70. City of Kalispell Growth Plan (2017) (Paraphrased).
99
■ The narrow two-lane segment of Whitefish Stage Road between Oregon Street and West
Reserve Drive is substandard, with the volume of traffic expected too nearly double.
■ There is no east / west connection between Highway 93 and Whitefish Stage Road north of
Oregon Street and south of West Reserve Drive, which inhibits free flowing access between
Kidsports, Flathead Valley Community College, the Highway 93 North retail area, and Fire
Station #62 with the Edgerton School neighborhood and Evergreen.
■ The City of Kalispell roadway network allows for evacuations to other communities as well as
many access points in/out of communities. Roads are wide, allowing fire apparatus access.
Evacuation will be deterred by rail crossing and weather-related setbacks such as snow or ice.
The Kalispell Bypass is an eight-mile stretch of roadway that is intended to divert traffic around
the center of Kalispell. The bypass begins at the intersection with US 93 on the southern edge of
Kalispell and extends north approximately 1.7 miles, ending 0.6 miles north of the Airport Road
roundabout. The Foys Lake Road Interchange begins 0.6 miles north of the Airport Road
roundabout and extends north along the Bypass approximately 1.7 miles, ending south of the
Ashley Creek Bridge which is 0.5 miles south of the intersection with US 2. This project is currently in
the final stages and has led to improvements on the Alternate Highway 93 route with
improvements at the Foy’s Lake intersection.
FIGURE 3-17: Alternative Highway 93 Project
Several public transit providers also serve the residents of Kalispell:
■ Mountain Climber Transportation, which provides fixed, fixed-deviated, and paratransit public
transportation in Flathead County including Kalispell. It is operated by Flathead County.
100
■ Tri-City Commuter Service, which offers three trips in the morning and afternoon to Columbia
Falls and Whitefish.
■ Eagle Transit Service, which covers an area from the North (Whitefish) with a stop at Alpine
Village Market to the South (Kalispell) with a stop at Laker's Field.
The road and transportation network described herein poses risks for a vehicular accident, some
at medium to greater than medium speeds, as well as vehicular-vs.-pedestrian/bicycle risks.
There are additional transportation risks since tractor-trailer and other commercial vehicles
traverse the roadways of the city to deliver mixed commodities to business locations. Fires or
releases of product involving these products can produce vapors, smoke, and other products of
combustion that may be hazardous to health. Additionally, there is risk for a mass casualty
incident involving mass transit buses either on specific bus routes/roads in the city or utilizing the
road network in the city for stops in jurisdictions external the city (Trailways and Greyhound
busses, casino bus services, as examples).
The City of Kalispell in cooperation with the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is in
the process of updating the Kalispell Area Transportation Plan, titled Move 2040. Move 2040 will
establish a set of existing and projected conditions for transportation in the Kalispell area.71 It is
highly recommended that member(s) of the fire department participate in this working group.
Summary and Observations:
■ Some traffic issues have been mitigated by the recent alternative Highway 93 project. Still,
roadways are busy, especially at peak times, creating hazards for emergency responders to
navigate traffic.
□ KFD should participate in the area transportation plan (Move 2040).
□ Technology exists, such as emergency vehicle streetlight preemption systems, to provide
emergency vehicles the right of way.72 Working with the City’s Street Department, these
technologies should be explored when updating intersections within the city.
≈ ≈ ≈
FIRE AND FIRE-RELATED INCIDENT RISK
An indication of the community’s fire risk is the type and number of fire-related incidents the fire
department responds to. CPSM conducted a data analysis for this project that analyzed KFD’s
incident responses and workload. The following table details the call types and call type totals
for these types of fire-related risks.
71. https://kalispellmove2040.com
72. https://tsmowa.org/category/intelligent-transportation-systems/traffic-signal-priority-preemption
101
TABLE 3-8: Fire Call Types
Call Type Total
Calls
Calls per
Day
False alarm 217 0.6
Good intent 44 0.1
Hazard 95 0.3
Outside fire 25 0.1
Public service 263 0.7
Structure fire 26 0.1
Fire Total 670 1.8
FIGURE 3-18: Fire Call Types Based on Percent
Observations:
■ Fire calls for the year totaled 670 (16 percent of all calls), an average of 1.8 per day.
■ Public service calls were the largest category of fire calls at 39 percent of fire calls, an
average of 0.7 calls per day.
■ False alarm calls made up 32 percent of fire calls, an average of 0.6 calls per day.
■ Structure and outside fire calls combined made up eight percent of fire calls, an average of
0.1 calls per day, or one call every seven days.
102
EMS RISK
As with fire risks, an indication of the community’s pre-hospital emergency medical risk is the
type and number of EMS calls to which the fire department responds. The following table
outlines the call types and call type totals in the KPD for these types of EMS risks.
TABLE 3-9: EMS Call Types
Call Type Total
Calls
Calls per
Day
Breathing difficulty 244 0.7
Cardiac and stroke 304 0.8
Fall and injury 502 1.4
Illness and other 1,276 3.5
MVA 164 0.4
Overdose and psychiatric 121 0.3
Seizure and unconsciousness 456 1.2
EMS Total 3,067 8.4
FIGURE 3-19: EMS Calls Based on Percent
Observations:
■ EMS calls for the year totaled 3,067 (71 percent of all calls), an average of 8.4 per day.
■ Illness and other calls were the largest category of EMS calls at 42 percent of EMS calls, an
average of 3.5 calls per day.
■ Cardiac and stroke calls made up 10 percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.8 calls per day.
■ Motor vehicle accidents made up five percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.4 calls per day.
≈ ≈ ≈
103
COMMUNITY LOSS AND SAVE INFORMATION
Fire loss is an estimation of the total loss from a fire to the structure and contents in terms of
replacement. Fire loss includes contents damaged by fire, smoke, water, and overhaul. Fire loss
does not include indirect loss, such as business interruption. In a 2021 report published by the
National Fire Protection Association on trends and patterns of U.S. fire losses, it was determined
that home fires still cause the majority of all civilian fire deaths, civilian injuries, and property loss
due to fire. Key findings from this report include:73
Public fire departments respond to 1,338,500 fires in 2020, a 7.5 percent increase from the
previous year.
■ 490,500 fires occurred in structures (37 percent). Of these fires, 379,500 occurred in residential
structures and 86,000 occurred in apartment or multifamily structures.
■ 2,230 civilian fire deaths occurred in residential fires, and 350 deaths occurred in apartments or
multifamily structures.
■ Home fires were responsible for 11,500 civilian injuries.
■ An estimated $21.9 billion in direct property damage occurred as a result of fire in 2020
(includes fires in the California wildland-urban interface and a large-loss naval ship fire in
California).
The following table shows overall fire loss in Kalispell in terms of dollar value for the data study
year, and over a five year period (2018-2022 . This information should be reviewed regularly and
discussed in accordance with response times to actual fire incidents, company level training,
effectiveness on the fireground, and effectiveness of incident command.
TABLE 3-10: Total Fire Loss Above and Below $25,000
Call Type No Loss Under $25,000 $25,000 plus Total
Outside fire 22 2 1 25
Structure fire 19 5 2 26
Total 41 7 3 51
TABLE 3-11: Property Loss 2018-2022
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
$1,033,385 $876,205 $830,575 $1,035,050 $139,200
Summary and Observations:
■ Over the five-year period, property ebbs and flows with 2022 having a significantly lower
property loss dollar value. As a note, property value loss is recorded by the person completing
the fire report, and typically estimates.
■ 22 outside fires and 19 structure fires had no recorded losses.
73. Fire loss in the United States (NFPA 2020).
104
■ One outside fire and two structure fires had $25,000 or more in recorded losses.
■ Structure fires:
□ The highest total loss for a structure fire was $105,000.
□ The average total loss for all structure fires was $6,622.
□ Five structure fires recorded content losses with a combined $60,120 in losses.
□ Out of 26 structure fires, seven had recorded property losses, with a combined $112,050 in
losses.
■ Outside fires:
□ The highest total loss for an outside fire was $32,000.
□ The average total loss for all outside fires was $1,488.
□ One outside fire recorded content loss with a combined $2,000 in losses.
□ Out of 25 outside fires, three had recorded property losses, with a combined $35,200 in
losses.
≈ ≈ ≈
FIRE AND EMS INCIDENT DEMAND
Analyzing where the fire and EMS incidents occur, and the demand density of fire and EMS
incidents, helps to determine adequate fire management zone resource assignment and
deployment. The following figures illustrate fire and EMS demand density within the city.
§ § §
105
FIGURE 3-20: Fire Demand Density in Kalispell, All Fire Calls
106
FIGURE 3-21: Fire Demand Density in Kalispell, Structure and Outside Fires
107
FIGURE 3-22: EMS Demand Density in Kalispell, All EMS Calls
108
Summary and Observations
Fire and EMS demand is more concentrated in Station 61’s area than Station 62’s area
(62 percent and 38 percent, respectively). This is about the same as when CPSM performed its
last review. This is largely due to population density in Station 61’s area. However, there has been
significant commercial and residential growth in Station 62’s area (see Population and
Community Growth report above). Current and planned densification, particularly to the
northern end of Kalispell, will continue to add to this demand for fire and EMS service.
≈ ≈ ≈
RESILIENCY
Resiliency is defined as “An organization’s ability to quickly recover from an incident or events, or
to adjust easily to changing needs or requirements.”74 Greater resiliency can be achieved by
constant review and analysis of the response system and focuses on three key components:
■ Resistance: The ability to deploy only resources necessary to control an incident and bring it to
termination safely and effectively.
■ Absorption: The ability of the agency to quickly add or duplicate resources necessary to
maintain service levels during heavy call volume or incidents of high resource demand.
■ Restoration: The agency’s ability to quickly return to a state of normalcy.
Resistance is controlled by the KFD through staffing and response protocol, and with KFD
resources dependent on the level of staffing and units available at the time of the alarm.
Absorption is accomplished through availability to respond by KFD units and through regional
automatic and mutual aid resources.
Restoration is managed by the city’s availability as simultaneous calls occur, the availability of
regional automatic and mutual aid resources, recall of personnel to staff fire units during
campaign events when warranted, and backfilling city stations as needed.
Absorption is accomplished through availability to respond by KFD units and through regional
mutual and automatic aid resources.
Restoration is managed by KFD unit availability as simultaneous calls occur, the availability of
regional automatic and mutual aid resources, recall of personnel to up-staff fire units during
campaign events when warranted, and backfilling PFD stations when needed through the
computer-aided dispatch at the fire dispatch center.
The following tables and figure analyze KFD resiliency. In this analysis, CPSM included all
4,293 calls for service for January 2022 to December 2022.
74. The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE), in the Fire and Emergency Service Self-Assessment
Manual (FESSAM), Ninth Edition.
109
TABLE 3-12: Runs and Workload by Station and KFD Units
Station Unit Unit Type Minutes
per Run
Total
Hours
Total
Percent
Minutes
per Day
Total
Runs
Runs per
Day
61
621 ALS Ambulance 37.8 414.1 13.6 68.1 657 1.8
631 Engine 21.9 822.5 27.1 135.2 2,254 6.2
Subtotal 25.5 1,236.6 40.8 203.3 2,911 8.0
62
622 ALS Ambulance 36.2 1,286.3 42.4 211.4 2,132 5.8
624 ALS Ambulance 35.7 447.6 14.8 73.6 752 2.1
642 Ladder 34.0 60.0 2.0 9.9 106 0.3
682 Wildland Unit 31.8 3.7 0.1 0.6 7 0.0
Subtotal 36.0 1,797.6 59.2 295.5 2,997 8.2
Total 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8 5,908 16.2
TABLE 3-13: Station Availability to Respond to Calls
First Due
Area
Calls in
Area
First Due
Responded
Percent
Responded
First Due
Arrived
Percent
Arrived
First Due
First
Percent
First
61 2,489 1,927 77.4 1,875 75.3 1,739 69.9
62 1,321 1,107 83.8 1,095 82.9 1,041 78.8
Total 3,810 3,034 79.6 2,970 78.0 2,780 73.0
Note: For each station, we count the number of calls within its first due area where at least one unit arrived. Next, we
focus on units from the first due station to see if any unit responded, arrived, or arrived first.
FIGURE 3-23: Calls by Hour of Day
110
TABLE 3-14: Frequency of Overlapping Calls by First Due Station Area
First Due
Area Scenario Number of
Calls
Percent of
Calls
Total
Hours
61
No overlapped call 2,215 83.8 1,290.2
Overlapped with one call 392 14.8 119.0
Overlapped with two calls 37 1.4 6.3
62
No overlapped call 1,291 91.4 735.3
Overlapped with one call 120 8.5 35.6
Overlapped with two calls 1 0.1 0.1
Note: 237 mutual aid calls outside KFD’s fire district were not included.
TABLE 3-15: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls
Calls in an Hour Frequency Percentage
0 5,478 62.5
1 2,462 28.1
2 653 7.5
3 145 1.7
4+ 22 0.3
Total 8,760 100.0
TABLE 3-16: Top 10 Hours with the Most Calls Received
Hour Number of Calls Number of Runs Deployed Hours
11/2/2022, 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. 6 6 1.5
1/5/2022, 11:00 a.m. to noon 4 7 3.7
7/7/2022, 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4 7 3.1
1/19/2022, 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 4 7 3.0
10/6/2022, 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 4 7 2.7
4/10/2022, 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 4 7 2.3
7/23/2022, 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. 4 6 3.6
12/5/2022, 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 4 6 3.4
11/7/2022, 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 4 6 2.5
9/2/2022, 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4 6 2.3
Note: Total deployed hours are a measure of the total time spent responding to calls received in the hour and may
extend into the next hour or hours. The number of runs and deployed hours were calculated based on all response units.
The following tables break down the workload of KFD by each station’s first due station area or
by external fire district where the calls occurred and provides further detail on the workload
associated with structure and outside fire calls, also broken down by fire district.
111
TABLE 3-17: Annual Workload by District
District / Station
Area Calls Percent
Calls Runs Runs Per
Day
Minutes
Per Run
Work
Hours
Percent
Work
Minutes
Per Day
KFD Station 61 2,644 61.6 3,880 10.6 29.9 1,936.3 63.8 318.3
KFD Station 62 1,412 32.9 1,764 4.8 30.9 908.3 29.9 149.3
Evergreen FD 65 1.5 68 0.2 49.5 56.1 1.8 9.2
Smith Valley FD 17 0.4 18 0.0 41.9 12.6 0.4 2.1
South Kalispell FD 58 1.4 67 0.2 33.0 36.8 1.2 6.1
West Valley FD 83 1.9 97 0.3 48.2 77.9 2.6 12.8
Other* 14 0.3 14 0.0 27.1 6.3 0.2 1.0
Total 4,293 100.0 5,908 16.2 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8
Note: *The 14 calls that occurred in “Other” districts include five calls in Whitefish, two calls in Creston, and one call each
in Badrock North, Bigfork, C. Falls, Glacier, Hungry Horse, the South Kalispell / Kalispell corner quadrant, and Somers fire
districts, respectively.
TABLE 3-18: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District
District / Station
Area
Structure Fires Outside Fires Combined
Runs Minutes
per Run
Run
s
Minutes
per Run
Annual
Hours
Percent
Work
KFD Station 61 36 76.7 28 36.3 63.0 62.9
KFD Station 62 10 29.4 4 23.2 6.5 6.5
Evergreen FD 12 108.0 0 NA 21.6 21.6
Smith Valley FD 4 64.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
South Kalispell FD 0 NA 1 26.4 0.4 0.4
West Valley FD 2 130.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
Total 64 76.1 33 34.4 100.1 100.0
This analysis of the KFD’s resiliency to respond to calls tells us:
■ KFD has about 16.2 runs per day.
■ The overall peak call time is 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., with a concentrated peak time between
the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
■ Ambulance 622 has the highest workload in terms of runs (5.8 a day), followed by Ambulance
624 and 621 (2.1 and 1.8 runs, respectively).
■ Of the 16.2 runs a day, 23.3 percent are overlapped with one other run. 1.5 percent of the runs
are overlapped by two or more simultaneous calls.
It was noted by the CPSM team in 2018 that the KFD had a moderate resiliency issue.
The KFD continues to have a moderate resiliency issue as detailed above. The KFD’s ability to
absorb multiple calls and restore response capabilities to a state of normalcy can be
challenging at certain times, which include multiple EMS calls that result in a transport, a single
working structure fire or multi-unit fire call in the city that ties up both fire units for extended time
periods, or lastly when a single fire unit and/or EMS unit is tied up for an extended period.
112
RISK CATEGORIZATION
The risks that the department faces can be natural or manufactured and may be affected by
the changing demographics of the community served. Risk is often categorized in three ways: 1)
the probability the event will occur in the community; 2) consequence of the event on the
community; and 3) the impact upon the fire department.
A comprehensive risk assessment is a critical aspect of creating standards of cover and can
assist the City of Kalispell in quantifying the risks that it faces. Once those risks are known, the
department is better equipped to determine if the current response resources are sufficiently
staffed, equipped, trained, and positioned.
In this component, the factors that drive the service needs are examined and then link directly
to discussions regarding the assembling of an effective response force (ERF) and when
contemplating the response capabilities needed to adequately address the existing risks, which
encompasses the component of critical tasking. The risks that the department faces can be
natural or manufactured and may be affected by the changing demographics of the
community served. Risk is often categorized in three ways:
■ The probability the event will occur in the community.
■ Consequence of the event on the community.
■ The impact on the fire department.
The following tables look at the probability of the event occurring within the City of Kalispell,
ranging from unlikely to frequent; The consequence of the event on the community, ranging
from insignificant to catastrophic; and the impact on the fire department, which also ranges
from insignificant to catastrophic.
TABLE 3-19: Event Probability
Probability Chance of
Occurrence Description Risk
Score
Unlikely 2% to 25% Event may occur only in exceptional
circumstances 2
Possible 26% to 75% Event could occur at some time and/or
recorded incidents. 4
Highly
Probable 76% to 90%
Event will probably occur and/or regular
recorded incidents and strong anecdotal
evidence. Considerable opportunity,
means, reason to occur.
8
Likely,
Frequent 91% to 100%
Event is expected to occur. High level of
recorded 10 incidents and/or very strong
anecdotal evidence. 10
113
TABLE 3-20: Consequence to Community Matrix
Impact Consequence
Categories Description Risk
Score
Insignificant Life Safety ■ 1 or 2 people affected, minor injuries, minor property
damage, and no environmental impact. 2
Minor
Life Safety
Economic and
Infrastructure
Environmental
■ Small number of people affected, no fatalities, and
small number of minor injuries with first aid
treatment. Minor displacement of people for <6
hours and minor personal support required.
■ Minor localized disruption to community services or
infrastructure for <6 hours. Minor impact on
environment with no lasting effects.
4
Moderate
Life Safety
Economic and
Infrastructure
Environmental
■ Limited number of people affected (11 to 25), no
fatalities, but some hospitalization and medical
treatment required. Localized displacement of small
number of people for 6 to 24 hours. Personal support
satisfied through local arrangements. Localized
damage is rectified by routine arrangements.
■ Normal community functioning with some
inconvenience. Some impact on environment with
short-term effects or small impact on environment
with long-term effects.
6
Significant
Life Safety
Economic and
Infrastructure
Environmental
■ Significant number of people (>25) in affected area
impacted with multiple fatalities, multiple serious or
extensive injuries, and significant hospitalization.
■ Large number of people displaced for 6 to 24 hours
or possibly beyond. External resources required for
personal support. Significant damage that requires
external resources. Community only partially
functioning, some services unavailable. Significant
impact on environment with medium- to long-term
effects.
8
Catastrophic
Life Safety
Economic and
Infrastructure
Environmental
■ Very large number of people in affected area(s)
impacted with significant numbers of fatalities, large
number of people requiring hospitalization; serious
injuries with long-term effects. General and wide-
spread displacement for prolonged duration;
extensive personal support required. Extensive
damage to properties in affected area requiring
major demolition.
■ Serious damage to infrastructure. Significant
disruption to, or loss of, key services for prolonged
period.
■ Community unable to function without significant
support.
■ Significant long-term impact on environment and/or
permanent damage.
10
114
TABLE 3-21: Impact on the Kalispell Fire Department
Impact Impact Categories Description
Risk
Score
Insignificant Personnel and
Resources
One apparatus out of service for period not
to exceed one hour. 2
Minor Personnel and
Resources
More than one but not more than two
apparatus out of service for a period not to
exceed one hour.
4
Moderate Personnel and
Resources
More than 50 percent of available
resources committed to incident for over 30
minutes.
6
Significant Personnel and
Resources
More than 75 percent of available
resources committed to an incident for
over 30 minutes.
8
Catastrophic Personnel, Resources,
and Facilities
More than 90 percent of available
resources committed to incident for more
than two hours or event which limits the
ability of resources to respond.
10
The City of Kalispell is responsible for providing four core services: fire response, medical response
(ALS / Transport), rescues, and hazardous materials response. The three-axis risk methodology
considers the probability of those occurrences, the likely consequence, and the impact on fire
department resources. CPSM then looks at the minimum requirements relating to the
organization and deployment of fire suppression operations, emergency medical operations,
and special operations to the public by career fire departments.75
The following sections contain an analysis of the various risks considered in the city. In this
analysis, information presented and reviewed in this section (All-Hazards Risk Assessment of the
Community) have been considered. In the past, risk analysis has only evaluated two factors of
risk: probability and consequence. Contemporary risk analysis considers the impact of each risk
to the organization, thus creating a three-axis approach to evaluating risk as depicted in the
following figure. Risk is categorized as Low, Moderate, High, or Special.
§ § §
75. NFPA 1710.
115
CPSM uses the three-axis risk assessment formula:
P = Probability (Y-Axis): Probability is associated with the frequency of an incident type.
C = Consequences (X-Axis): Consequence is the measure of the outcome of an incident type by
identifying and categorizing community hazards. Risk factors then quantify the degree of
potential danger the hazard presents.
I = Impact (Z-Axis): Impact describes a fire department’s ability to provide ongoing services to
the remaining areas of a community and what plan is in place for both the current incident, but
also overall high-volume demand areas. It is important to have a plan in place to relocate
response resources, use mutual or automatic aid, as an examples, to ensure the best coverage
possible.
The following graphs should help illustrate:
FIGURE 3-24: Three-Axis Risk Calculation
The following factors/hazards were identified and considered:
■ Demographic factors such as age, socio-economic, vulnerability.
■ Environmental hazards such as major weather events, snow and ice events, wind events.
■ Manufactured hazards such as rail lines, roads and intersections, target hazards.
■ Structural/building risks.
■ Fire and EMS incident numbers and density.
The assessment of each factor and hazard as listed below took into consideration the likelihood
of the event, the impact on the city itself, and the impact on the fire department’s ability to
deliver emergency services. The list is not all inclusive but includes categories most common or
that may present to the city.
116
Low Risk
■ Automatic fire/false alarms.
■ Low acuity-BLS EMS Incidents.
■ Low-risk environmental event.
■ Motor vehicle accident (MVA), with no entrapment or multiple patients.
■ Good intent/hazard/public service fire incidents with no life-safety exposure.
■ Outside fires such as grass, rubbish, dumpster, vehicle with no structural/life-safety exposure.
FIGURE 3-25: Low Risk
§ § §
Typically calls involving one
or two units.
117
Moderate Risk
■ Fire incident in a single-family dwelling where fire and smoke or smoke is visible, indicating a
working fire.
■ Suspicious substance investigation involving multiple fire companies and law enforcement
agencies.
■ ALS EMS incident.
■ MVA with entrapment.
■ Small aircraft incident.
■ Low-angle rescue involving ropes and rope rescue equipment and resources.
■ Surface water rescue.
■ Good intent/hazard/public service fire incidents with life-safety exposure.
■ Rail event with no release of product or fire, and no threat to life safety.
FIGURE 3-26: Moderate Risk
§ § §
In recent years, the city has
seen the removal of the rail
system and the addition of
the highway bypass
project. The city has also
seen an increase in
population.
118
High Risk
■ Working fire in a target hazard.
■ Cardiac arrest.
■ Mass casualty incident of more than 10 but less than 24 patients.
■ Confined space rescue.
■ Structure collapse involving life-safety exposure.
■ High-angle rescue involving ropes and rope rescue equipment.
■ Trench rescue.
■ Suspicious substance incident with multiple injuries.
■ Industrial leak of hazardous materials that causes exposure to persons or threatens life safety.
■ Weather events that create widespread flooding, heavy winds, building damage, and/or life-
safety exposure.
■ Hazardous materials spill or leak.
FIGURE 3-27: High Risk
§ § §
Calls that would
require multiple
resources (second or
greater alarm).
119
Special Risk
■ Working fire in a structure of more than three floors.
■ Fire at an industrial building or complex with hazardous materials.
■ Fire in an occupied targeted hazard with special life-safety risks such as age, medical
condition, or other identified vulnerabilities.
■ Mass casualty incident of more than 25 patients.
■ Aircraft incident, re-routed commercial airliner, miliary aircraft that causes mass casualty.
■ Rail or transportation incident that causes life-safety exposure or threatens life safety through
the release of hazardous smoke or materials and evacuation of residential and business
occupancies.
■ Explosion in a building that causes exposure to persons or threatens life safety or outside of a
building that creates exposure to occupied buildings or threatens life safety.
■ Massive river/estuary flooding, fire in a correctional or medical institution, high-impact
environmental event, pandemic.
■ Mass gathering with threat fire and threat to life safety or other civil unrest, weapons of mass
destruction release.
FIGURE 3-28: Special Risk
§ § §
Typically calls
involving mutual aid
resources.
120
All-Hazards Risk Assessment Recommendations:
■ KFD should address the wildland threat from surrounding WUI areas. This should include
working with the county on evacuation systems (zones, maps, notifications, evacuation
centers, etc.), staffing policies for high fire periods (Red Flag weather), review of mutual and
automatic aid agreements, etc. (Recommendation No. 33.)
■ KFD should conduct regional mutual aid agency drills that address issues such as mass
shootings. (Recommendation No. 34.)
■ CPSM recommends fire staff attend and participate in Move the 2040 committee and be an
active voice on street improvement initiatives. (Recommendation No. 35.)
■ CPSM recommends the city consider pre-emption emergency vehicle right-of-way street light
technology. (Recommendation No. 36.)
§ § §
121
SECTION 4. FIRE AND EMS OPERATIONS,
DEPLOYMENT, AND PERFORMANCE
Fire and Emergency Medical Services is the operational branch of KFD that provides emergency
response to calls for assistance. In addition to normal fire and emergency medical responses at
the ALS level, the department provides mutual aid to neighboring jurisdictions and has personnel
trained to handle complex technical rescues, ice rescues, and to support the Kalispell Police
Special Response Team. The department is host to the Northwest Hazardous Materials Response
Team. Operations personnel also perform company level training, fire prevention including
limited company level inspections, fire preplanning, fire hydrant inspections, and community-
based programs.
Fire, rescue, and emergency medical system (EMS) incidents, and the fire department’s ability to
respond to, manage, and mitigate them effectively, efficiently, and safely, are mission-critical
components of the emergency services delivery system. In fact, fire, rescue, and EMS operations
provide the primary, and certainly most important, basis for the very existence of the fire
department.
Nationwide, fire departments are responding to more EMS calls and fewer fire calls, particularly
fire calls that result in active firefighting operations by responders. This is well-documented in
both national statistical data as well as CPSM fire studies. Kalispell is mostly consistent with these
trends based upon the data we collected numbers. Those facts notwithstanding, improved
building construction, code enforcement, automatic sprinkler systems, and aggressive public
education programs have contributed to a decrease in serious fires and, more importantly, fire
deaths among civilians.
Despite trends and improvements in the overall fire protection system, fires still do occur, and the
largest percentage of those occur in residential occupancies where they place the civilian
population at risk. Although they occur with less frequency than they did several decades ago,
when they occur today, they grow much quicker and burn more intensely than they did in the
past. As will be discussed later in this section, it is imperative that the fire department is able to
assemble an effective response force (ERF) within a reasonable time period in order to
successfully mitigate these incidents with the least amount of loss possible.
Fire and EMS Incident Increase, 2018–2023
The fire and EMS delivery system in Kalispell is an integrated one where the KFD provides all
services. Other surrounding emergency services providers will occasionally help with major
incidents or during times of heavy incident activity. Since the previous analysis CPSM conducted
for the Kalispell Fire Department, fire and EMS incidents have increased as follows:
■ Total call volume increased 23.5 percent over a five-year period from 3,477 in 2018 to 4,293 in
2022.
■ EMS calls increased 19 percent from 2,567 in 2018 to 3,067 in 2022.
■ Fire calls increased 32 percent from 506 in 2018 to 670 in 2022.
■ Other calls (canceled and mutual aid combined) increased 38 percent from 404 in 2018 to
556 in 2022.
122
FIGURE 4-1: KFD Incident Increase, 2018–2022
CURRENT KFD FIRE OPERATIONAL STAFFING AND SERVICE DELIVERY
MODEL
When exploring staffing and deployment of a fire department it is prudent to design an
operational strategy around the actual circumstances that exist in the community and the fire
and risk problems that are identified. The strategic and tactical challenges presented by the
widely varied hazards that a department protects against need to be identified and planned for
through a community risk analysis planning and management process, as completed in this
report. It is ultimately the responsibility of elected officials to decide the level of risk that is
acceptable to their community. Once the acceptable level of risk has been decided, then
operational service goals can be established. Whether looking at acceptable risk, or level of
service goals, it would be imprudent, and probably very costly, to build a deployment strategy
that is based solely on response times and emotion.
The staffing of fire and EMS units is a never-ending focus of attention among fire service and
governmental leadership. While NFPA 1710 and OSHA provide guidelines (and to some extent
the law, specifically OSHA in OSHA states) as to the level of staffing and response of personnel,
the adoption of these documents varies from state to state, and department to department.
NFPA 1710 addresses the recommended staffing in terms of specific types of occupancies and
risks. The needed staffing to conduct the critical tasks for each specific occupancy and risk are
determined to be the Effective Response Force (ERF). The ERF for each type of occupancy is
detailed in NFPA 1710 (2020 edition), section 5.2.4, Deployment.
One of the factors that has helped the fire service in terms of staffing is technology. The fire
service continues to benefit from technological advances that help firefighters extinguish fires
more effectively. More advanced equipment in terms of nozzles, personal protective gear,
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Number of Incidents 3,477 3,556 3,726 4,136 4,293
+2.3%+4.8%
+11.0%+3.8%
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
In
c
i
d
e
n
t
V
o
l
u
m
e
Kalispell Incidents
123
thermal imaging systems, advancements in self-contained breathing apparatus, incident
command strategies, drones with infrared cameras, and devices used to track personnel air
supply are some of the technologies and techniques that help firefighters extinguish fires faster
and manage the fireground more effectively and safely. While some of these technologies do
not reduce the staffing or workforce needed, they do have an impact on firefighter safety,
property loss, and crew fatigue.
Even with the many advances in technology and equipment, the fireground is an unforgiving
and dynamic environment where firefighters must complete critical tasks simultaneously.
Lightweight wood construction, truss roofs, dwellings and buildings with basements, increased
setbacks that make accessibility to the building difficult, and large footprint commercial
buildings and estate homes are examples of the challenges that firefighting forces are met with
when mitigating structural fires. Kalispell is currently experiencing a significant amount of new
residential and multifamily construction, and most newly constructed homes are larger than
much of the older home stock. These homes tend to incorporate open floor plans, with large
spaces that contribute to rapid fire spread. In addition, homes constructed since 1980—a
significant portion of the housing stock in Kalispell—most likely incorporate lightweight
construction which contributes to rapid fire spread and the potential for early collapse of the
entire structure. Large commercial buildings present firefighters with different sets of hazards and
risks. The challenge of rapid fire spread is exacerbated by the use of lightweight roof trusses, vinyl
siding, and combustible sheathing. The result is that more personnel are required to mitigate the
incidents safely and effectively in these structures. Providing adequate staffing through an
Effective Response Force for these environments depends on many factors.
The operations necessary to successfully extinguish a structure fire, and do so effectively,
efficiently, and safely, require a carefully coordinated and controlled plan of action where
certain operations such as venting ahead of the advancing interior hose line(s) must be carried
out with a high degree of precision and timing. Multiple operations, frequently where seconds
count, such as search and rescue operations and trying to cut off a rapidly advancing fire, must
also be conducted simultaneously. If there are not enough personnel on the incident initially to
perform all the critical tasks, some tasks will, out of necessity, be delayed. This can result in an
increased risk of serious injury or death to building occupants and firefighters, and increased
property damage.
While staffing and deployment of fire services is not an exact science, CPSM has developed
metrics it follows and recommends that communities consider when making recommendations
about staffing and deployment of fire resources. While there are many benchmarks that
communities and management use in justifying certain staffing levels, there are certain
considerations that are data driven and presented through national consensus that serve this
purpose as well. CPSM recommends that communities consider these factors when making
decisions regarding staffing and deployment of fire resources.
Staffing is one component of these metrics and is linked to station location and what type of
apparatus is responding, that is, the combination of engine, ladder, ambulance, or specialty
apparatus. These joint factors help to determine what level of fire and EMS service is going to be
delivered in terms of labor, response time, and resources.
Linked to these components of staffing and deployment are critical factors that drive various
levels and models from which fire and EMS departments staff and deploy. These factors are:
All-Hazard Risk and Vulnerability of the Community: A fire department collects and organizes risk
evaluation information about individual properties, and on the basis of the rated factors then
derives a “fire risk score” for each property. The community risk and vulnerability assessment
124
evaluates the community as a whole, and with regard to property, measures all property and
the risk associated with that property and then segregates the property as either a high-,
medium-, or low-hazard depending on factors such as the life and building content hazard, and
the potential fire flow, staffing, and apparatus types required to mitigate an emergency in the
specific property. Factors such as fire protection systems are considered in each building
evaluation. Included in this assessment should be both a structural and nonstructural (weather,
wildland-urban interface, transportation routes, etc.) analysis. All factors are then analyzed and
the probability of an event occurring, the impact on the fire department, and the
consequences on the community are measured and scored.
Population, Demographics, and Socioeconomics of a Community: Population and population
density drives calls for local government service, particularly public safety. The risk from fire is not
the same for everyone, with studies telling us age, gender, race, economic factors, and what
region in the country one might live in contribute to the risk of death from fire. Studies also tell us
these same factors affect demand for EMS, particularly population increase and the more
frequent use of hospital emergency departments as many uninsured or underinsured patients
rely on EDs for their primary and emergent care, utilizing prehospital EMS transport systems as
their entry point.
Call Demand: Demand is made up of the types of calls to which units are responding and the
location of the calls. This drives workload and station location considerations. Higher population
centers with increased demand require more resources.
Workload of Units: This factor involves the types of calls to which units are responding and the
workload of each unit in the deployment model. This defines what resources are needed and
where; it links to demand and station location, or in a dynamic deployed system, the area(s) in
which to post units.
Travel Times from Fire Stations: Analyzes the ability to cover the fire management zone/response
district in a reasonable and acceptable travel time when measured against national
benchmarks such as NFPA 1710, and the ISO-FSRS engine and ladder company grading
parameters. This metric links to demand, risk assessment, unit workload, and resiliency.
NFPA Standards, ISO, OSHA requirements (and other national benchmarking).
EMS Demand: Community demand; demand on available units and crews; hospital off-load
wait times; demand on non-EMS transport units responding to calls for service (fire/police units);
availability of crews in departments that utilize cross-trained EMS staff to perform fire suppression.
Critical Tasking: On-scene capabilities to control and mitigate emergencies are determined by
staffing and deployment of certain resources for low-, medium-, and high-risk responses. Critical
tasking involves the individual or team-level tasks that are required to be performed by on-scene
personnel based on the type of incident the firefighting and EMS force is responding to. Critical
tasks are to the greatest extent performed simultaneously for a more effective operation aimed
at increased firefighter and the public’s safety. Those risks/incidents requiring more critical tasks
to be performed simultaneously drive a larger response force. An example of the importance of
simultaneous critical tasking is a search and rescue crew and a ventilation crew operating while
a crew or crews are advancing attack lines.
Effective Response Force: The ability of the jurisdiction to assemble the necessary personnel on
the scene to perform the critical tasks necessary in rapid sequence to mitigate the emergency.
The speed, efficiency, and safety of on-scene operations are dependent upon the number of
firefighters performing the tasks. If fewer firefighters are available to complete critical on-scene
125
tasks, those tasks will require more time to complete and impact overall operations and the
safety of firefighters and the public.
Innovations in Staffing and Deployable
Apparatus: The fire department’s ability and
willingness to develop and deploy innovative
apparatus (combining two apparatus functions
into one to maximize available staffing, as an
example). Deploying quick response vehicles
(light vehicles equipped with medical equipment
and some light fire suppression capabilities) on
those calls (typically the largest percentage) that
do not require heavy fire apparatus.
Community Expectations: The gathering of input
and feedback from the community, then measuring, understanding, and developing goals and
objectives to meet community expectations.
Ability to Fund: The community’s understanding of, and its ability and willingness to fund fire and
EMS services, while considering how budgetary revenues are divided up to meet all of a
community’s expectations.
≈ ≈ ≈
While each component presents its own metrics of data, consensus opinion, and/or discussion
points, aggregately they form the foundation for informed decision-making geared toward the
implementation of sustainable, data- and theory-supported, effective fire and EMS staffing and
deployment models that fit the community’s profile, risk, and expectations. The City of Kalispell
had not updated the comprehensive analysis of these elements from the 2018 study prior to this
analysis. However, part of CPSM’s work and analysis involved the completion of an updated
community fire risk and target hazard analysis based upon the city’s rapid growth the past five
years.
The KFD currently has an authorized staff of 35 personnel. Of these, 34 are sworn emergency
response personnel, with 32 assigned to fire and EMS operations positions while the remaining
two, the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief, perform a variety of administrative and support
functions. The single non-uniformed person is an office Administrative Assistant position who
performs a variety of roles for the department.
Each department shift (except D Shift) has a total of 10 personnel assigned, including two
Captains, two Engineers, and six firefighters, with an allowance for up to three personnel off per
shift. D Shift, which is between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. daily, is staffed with two firefighters. One
of these personnel is on duty each day. Twenty-four of the department’s operations personnel
are certified paramedics (EMT-P); the remainder are Advanced Emergency Medical Technicians
(AEMTs). CPSM was informed that in 2006 when Station 62 opened, and the city’s population
and call volume were much lower, each shift had 11 personnel assigned.
The minimum staffing specified by the contract is five personnel on duty. The KFD normally tries to
have a minimum of seven personnel on duty from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and six on duty from
7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. By contract up to three personnel can be off on scheduled leave at one
time.
The department delivers field operations and emergency response services through a clearly
defined division of labor that includes middle managers/first-line operational supervisors
126
(Captains), technical specific staff (Engineers), and firefighters. Currently, the entire city is
considered a single operational unit and is commanded each day by the senior captain
working. Field personnel work a three-platoon, 56-hour work week that is comprised of 24-hour
long duty days. Personnel are on duty for 24 hours followed by 48 hours off duty. They work a 212-
hour, 28-day cycle that includes Kelly Days. Some of the challenges associated with the number
of Kelly Days that KFD members earn were discussed in Section 2 of this report.
The KFD currently operates out of two stations, staffing one engine, one quint/ladder, and
multiple EMS units. The number and types of units staffed is dependent upon the on-duty staffing.
The following figure illustrates KFD deployment at each staffing level.
TABLE 4-1: KFD Staffing Matrix
On-Duty Staffing
Level
Station 61
Staffing Unit(S) Staffed Station 62
Staffing Unit(S) Staffed
5 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 2 Ambulance w/ 2
6 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 3
Ladder w/ 3
or
Ambulance w/ 3
7 Personnel 3 Engine w/ 3 4
Ladder w/ 4
and/or
2 Ambulances w/ 2
8 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 3
Ladder w/ 3
or
Ambulance w/ 3
9 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 4
Ladder w/ 4
and/or
2 Ambulances w/ 2
10 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 5 Ladder w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2
11 Personnel 6 Engine w/ 4
Ambulance w/ 2 5 Ladder w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2
The table above depicts various staffing levels and deployment models for the department. As
discussed earlier, KFD assigns extra personnel on each shift to fill in for scheduled and
unscheduled leave. The KFD, like many fire departments across the country, staffs through the
minimum-staffing level model, meaning that on each shift there is a minimum number of staffed
positions to be filled each day. When the number of positions vacated by scheduled or
unscheduled leave drives the number of personnel available below minimum staffing levels,
positions are then backfilled by overtime staffing.
The following figure illustrates the location of the KFD fire stations.
§ § §
127
FIGURE 4-2: KFD Station Locations
FIRE OPERATIONS
With a population density estimated to be approximately 1,976 people per square mile, Kalispell
is considered an urban community by the Census Bureau. Like many older communities that are
now experiencing growth, the city has an assortment of commercial, industrial, and residential
buildings it must protect, including a growing number of multifamily residential buildings and
large commercial facilities. If a fire grows to an area in excess of 2,000 square feet, or extends
beyond the building of origin, it is most probable that additional personnel and equipment will
be needed, as initial response personnel will be taxed beyond their available resources. This is
particularly true in the older, more densely developed areas of the city including the downtown
business district.
From this perspective it is critical that KFD units respond quickly and initiate extinguishment efforts
as rapidly as possible after notification of an incident. It is, however, difficult to determine in
every case the effectiveness of the initial response in limiting the fire spread and fire damage.
Many variables will impact these outcomes, including:
128
■ The time of detection, notification, and ultimately response of fire units.
■ The age and type of construction of the structure. Being primarily a community where
significant development has occurred since the 1980s, many of the buildings in Kalispell will be
of lightweight construction, which is prone to early collapse in a fire situation.
■ The presence of any built-in protection (automatic fire sprinklers) or fire detection systems.
Fortunately, the majority of the new commercial construction in Kalispell is equipped with
automatic fire suppression systems.
■ The contents that are stored in the structure and its flammability.
■ The presence of any flammable liquids, explosives, or compressed gas canisters.
■ Weather conditions and the availability of water for extinguishment.
Subsequently, in those situations in which there are extended delays in the extinguishment effort,
or the fire has progressed sufficiently upon arrival of fire units, there is actually very little that can
be done to limit the extent of damage to the entire structure and its contents. In these situations,
suppression efforts may need to focus on the protection of nearby or adjacent structures
(exterior exposures) with the goal being to limit the spread of the fire beyond the building of
origin, and sometimes the exposed building. This is often termed protecting exposures. When the
scope of damage is extensive, and the building becomes unstable, firefighting tactics typically
move to what is called a defensive attack, or one in which hose lines and more importantly
personnel are on the outside of the structure and their focus is to merely discharge large
volumes of water until the fire goes out. In these situations, the ability to enter the building is very
limited and if victims are trapped in the structure, there are very few safe options for making
entry.
Today’s fire service is actively debating the options of interior firefighting vs. exterior firefighting.
These terms are self-descriptive in that an interior fire attack is one in which firefighters enter a
burning building in an attempt to find the seat of the fire and from this interior position extinguish
the fire with limited amounts of water. An exterior fire attack, also sometimes referred to as a
transitional attack, is a tactic in which firefighters initially discharge water from the exterior of the
building, either through a window or door and knock down the fire before entry in the building is
made. The concept is to introduce larger volumes of water initially from the outside of the
building, cool the interior temperatures, and reduce the intensity of the fire before firefighters
enter the building. A transitional attack is most applicable in smaller structures, typically single
family, one-story detached units which are smaller than approximately 2,500 square feet in total
floor area. For fires in larger structures, the defensive-type, exterior attacks generally involve the
use of master streams capable of delivering large volumes of water for an extended period of
time.
Recent studies by UL have evaluated the effectiveness of interior vs. exterior attacks in certain
simulated fire environments. These studies have found the exterior attack to be equally effective
in these simulations.76 This debate is deep-seated in the fire service and traditional tactical
measures have always proposed an interior fire attack, specifically when there is a possibility that
victims may be present in the burning structure. The long-held belief in opposition to an exterior
attack is that this approach may actually push the fire into areas that are not burning or where
76. “Innovating Fire Attack Tactics,” U.L.COM/News Science, Summer 2013.
129
victims may be located. The counterpoint supporting the exterior attack centers on firefighter
safety.
The exterior attack limits the firefighter
from making entry into those super-
heated structures that may be
susceptible to collapse. From CPSM’s
perspective, there is at least some
likelihood that a single crew of three
personnel will encounter a significant and
rapidly developing fire situation. This
situation can occur during times of high
incident activity when other units may be
committed on other emergencies, or, in
fringe areas of the city where other units
responding to the incident may have
longer response times to arrive on the
scene. It is prudent, therefore, that the
KFD build at least a component of its
training and operating procedures around the tactical concept of the exterior fire attack when
the situation warrants such an approach.
Fire Operations Recommendations:
■ The KFD should build at least a portion of its training regimens and tactical strategies around
the exterior or transitional attack for when the fire scenario and the number of available
units/responding personnel warrants this approach. (Recommendation No. 37.)
■ In acknowledgement of the fact that the KFD operates in a minimal staffing mode and
recognizing the potential for rapid fire spread, particularly in the more densely developed
areas of the city, the KFD should equip all its apparatus with the appropriate appliances and
hose and develop standardized tactical operations that will enable arriving crews to quickly
deploy high-volume fire flows of 1,200 to 1,500 gallons per minute (if the water supply will
permit this), utilizing multiple hose lines, appliances, and master stream devices. This flow
should be able to be developed within four to five minutes after the arrival of an apparatus
staffed with three personnel. (Recommendation No. 38.)
≈ ≈ ≈
Wildland-Urban Interface
Wildland-urban interface (WUI) is a term commonly known in areas that experience wildfires. The
WUI is the zone of transition between unoccupied land and human development. It is the line,
area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with
undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. The expanding WUI has become a growing concern
in many areas of the country as people leave urban, older, densely populated areas for what
have traditionally been low-density rural areas or at a minimum fringe or outer ring suburbs. It
appears this migration has accelerated since the arrival of COVID.
The challenges of the WUI are exacerbated in communities such as Kalispell that are undergoing
rapid growth and development. These areas present some unique challenges to firefighters,
especially those more accustomed to combating fires in urban or suburban areas. As the WUI
continues to grow, these fires will become an increasing problem for fire departments across the
130
country. Any area that experiences brush fires, grass fires, forest fires or outdoor fires can
experience WUI incidents. These fires can have the same impact when they occur close to
homes, neighborhoods, and communities. Communities need to understand the risks and make
changes to their environments to make them less susceptible to fire.
According to the U.S. Forest Service, the number of houses in the WUI relative to the total houses
in Montana ranges between 60.1 percent and 82.6 percent of the houses.77 As the next figure
illustrates, Kalispell is considered surrounded by WUI. This is something that the city and KFD will
need to maintain an awareness of.
FIGURE 4-3: Kalispell Area Wildland-Urban Interface
The KFD has taken some steps to address the WUI and wildland firefighting. Wildland/brush truck
682 responds from Station 62. All KFD personnel are trained and capable of wildland response.
77. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/what-is-the-
wui.html#:~:text=The%20WUI%20is%20the%20zone,undeveloped%20wildland%20or%20vegetative%20fuels.
131
This includes personnel who are Red Card-certified at Wildland Firefighter I and II levels. Some
personnel are qualified as Crew Bosses (comparable to a KFD Captain).
As Kalispell continues to grow and develop, the city will need to maintain an awareness of its
WUI. It should also consider becoming a fire-adapted community (FAC), which is one that
collaborates to identify its wildfire risk and works collectively on actionable steps to reduce its risk
of loss. This work protects property and increases the safety of firefighters and residents. Creating
a FAC is a part of the National Cohesive Wildfire Management Strategy to keep communities
safer during a wildfire event.
Wildland-Urban Interface Recommendations:
■ The KFD should address the wildland threat from surrounding WUI areas. This should include
working with the county on evacuation systems (zones, maps, notifications, evacuation
centers, etc.), staffing policies for high fire periods (Red Flag weather), review of mutual and
automatic aid agreements, etc. (Recommendation No. 39.)
■ The City of Kalispell should consider becoming a fire-adapted community (FAC) collaborating
to identify its wildfire risk and working collectively on actionable steps to reduce its risk of loss.
Part of this process should include the creation of a written assessment of risks using a
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) or Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan.78
(Recommendation No. 40.)
≈ ≈ ≈
Fire Preplanning
An important part of risk management in the fire service is pre-fire planning inspections by fire
companies of large, high-hazard, and complex buildings in each fire response zone. A fire
company’s pre-fire surveys can have a significant impact by potentially reducing structural fire
loss and reducing firefighter injuries. Pre-fire inspections can improve firefighters’ understanding
of complex building layouts, standpipe locations, etc., and they may be able to identify any
structural changes and possible code violations. This will help improve suppression ground
activities and prevent firefighter injuries.
The process of identifying target hazards and pre-incident planning are basic preparedness
efforts that have been key functions in the fire service for many years. In this process, critical
structures are identified based on the risk they pose. Then, tactical considerations are
established for fires or other emergencies in these structures. Consideration is given to the
activities that take place (manufacturing, processing, etc.), the number and types of occupants
(elderly, youth, handicapped, imprisoned, etc.), and other specific aspects relating to the
construction of the facility or any hazardous or flammable materials that are regularly found in
the building. Target hazards are those occupancies or structures that are unusually dangerous
when considering the potential for loss of life or the potential for property damage. Typically,
these occupancies include hospitals, nursing homes, and high-rise and other large structures.
Also included are arenas and stadiums, industrial and manufacturing plants, and other buildings
or large complexes.
NFPA’s 1620, Recommended Practice for Pre-Incident Planning, identifies the need to utilize both
written narrative and diagrams to depict the physical features of a building, its contents, and
78. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/communities/
132
any built-in fire protection systems. Information collected for pre-fire/incident plans includes, but
is certainly not limited to, data such as:
■ The occupancy type.
■ Floor plans/layouts.
■ Building construction type and features.
■ Fire protection systems (sprinkler system, standpipe systems, etc.).
■ Utility locations.
■ Hazards to firefighters and/or firefighting operations.
■ Special conditions in the building.
■ Apparatus placement plan.
■ Fire flow requirements and/or water supply plan.
■ Forcible entry and ventilation plan.
The information contained in pre-incident fire plans allows firefighters and officers to have a
familiarity with the building/facility, its features, characteristics, operations, and hazards, thus
enabling them to conduct firefighting and other emergency operations more effectively,
efficiently, and safely. Pre-incident fire plans should be reviewed regularly and tested by
periodic table-top exercises and on-site drills for the most critical occupancies.
The members of the Kalispell Fire Department reported to CPSM that they have a formal, pre-
fire/incident planning program that has resulted in development of plans for about 50 percent
of commercial locations in the city. However, this does not include new construction that is
occurring. Every Monday is “Pre-plan Day,” when companies are supposed to go out to
complete pre-plans. At the current time, due in part to security issues with the city’s network, the
plans are not available digitally to personnel on scene. The lack of pre-fire/incident plan
availability on scene deprives responding personnel and commanders of important information
that may be critical to effective and safe incident mitigation. The Chief reported that he is
looking into obtaining tablets to provide on-scene access to the pre-plans.
An increasingly important part of fire department risk identification, assessment, and
management is the identification of unsafe structures in the city that could pose an increased,
and often unnecessary, risk to firefighters during a fire situation. Once these buildings have been
identified they should be marked as being unsafe. In the event of a fire, unless the fire is still a
small, incipient fire, which can be extinguished quickly and safely, operations at these structures
should be limited to exterior, defensive operations.
Fire Preplanning Recommendations:
■ CPSM recommends that as a planning objective, the KFD should continue to make pre-
fire/incident plan development a high priority until such time as plans have been developed
for all high- and medium-hazard occupancies located in the city, placing a high priority on
those identified structures that are not protected by automatic sprinkler systems. In addition,
pre-plans should be uploaded onto computers/tablets and the CAD system so they will be
more readily available to personnel on the incident scene. (Recommendation No. 41.)
133
■ The KFD should compile an inventory of the locations of vacant and unsafe structures
throughout the city and mark them accordingly with regard to offensive or defensive-only fire
suppression operations. (Recommendation No. 42.)
≈ ≈ ≈
NFPA 1710 AS A NATIONAL CONSENSUS STANDARD
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards are consensus standards and not
mandated nor are they the law. Many cites and countries strive to achieve these standards to
the extent possible without an adverse fiscal impact to the community. Cities and communities
must decide on the level of service they can deliver based on several factors as discussed
herein, including budgetary considerations. Questions of legal responsibilities are often discussed
in terms of compliance with NFPA Standards. Again, these are national consensus standards,
representing best practices and applied science and research.
NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations,
Emergency Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire
Departments, 2020 edition (National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Mass.), outlines
organization and deployment of operations by career, and primarily career, fire, and rescue
organizations.79 It serves as a benchmark to measure staffing and deployment of resources to
certain structures and emergencies.
NFPA 1710 was the first organized approach to defining levels of service, deployment
capabilities, and staffing levels for substantial career departments. Research work and empirical
studies in North America were used by NFPA committees as the basis for developing response
times and resource capabilities for those services as identified by the fire department.80 It is also
the benchmark standard that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security utilizes when
evaluating applications for staffing grants under the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency
Response (SAFER) grant program. The ability to get a sufficient number of personnel, along with
appropriate apparatus, to the scene of a structure fire is critical to operational success and
firefighter safety. Accomplishing this within the eight-minute time frame specified in NFPA 1710 is
an important operational benchmark.
According to NFPA 1710, fire departments should base their capabilities on a formal all-hazards
community risk assessment, as discussed earlier in this report, and taking into consideration:81
■ Life hazard to the population protected.
■ Provisions for safe and effective firefighting performance conditions for the firefighters.
■ Potential property loss.
■ Nature, configuration, hazards, and internal protection of the properties involved.
■ Types of fireground tactics and evolutions employed as standard procedure, type of
apparatus used, and results expected to be obtained at the fire scene.
79. NFPA 1710 is a nationally recognized standard, but it has not been adopted as a mandatory regulation
by the federal government or the State of Montana. It is a valuable resource for establishing and
measuring performance objectives for the City of Kalispell but should not be the only determining factor
when making local decisions about the city’s fire services.
80. NFPA, Origin and Development of the NFPA 1710, 1710-1.
81. NFPA 1710, 5.2.1.1, 5.2.2.2.
134
The NFPA 1710 staffing configuration is designed to ensure a fire department can complete the
critical tasking necessary on building fires and other emergency incidents simultaneously rather
than consecutively, and efficiently assemble an effective response force for each risk they may
encounter. NFPA 1710 permits fire departments to use established automatic aid and mutual aid
agreements to comply with the assembling of on-scene personnel to complete critical tasks as
outlined in the standard.
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, NFPA 1500, TWO-IN/TWO-OUT
Another consideration, and one that links to critical tasking and assembling an Effective
Response Force, is that of two-in/two-out regulations. Essentially, prior to starting any fire attack in
an immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH) environment [with no confirmed rescue in
progress], the initial two-person entry team shall ensure that there are sufficient resources on-
scene to establish a two-person initial rapid intervention team (IRIT) located outside of the
building.
This critical tasking model has its genesis with the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, specifically 29 CFR 1910.134(g)(4). Montana establishes regulations for firefighters
including the adoption of OSHA regulations and NFPA standards. Federal OSHA covers the issues
not specifically covered by the Montana regulations. As such, the federal rule (29 CFR
1910.134(g)(4)) applies to the KFD.
According to CFR 1910.134: Procedures for Interior Structural Firefighting, the employer shall
ensure that:
(i) At least two employees enter the IDLH atmosphere and remain in visual or voice contact with
one another at all times;
(ii) At least two employees are located outside the IDLH atmosphere; and
(iii) All employees engaged in interior structural firefighting use SCBAs.82
According to the standard, one of the two individuals located outside the IDLH atmosphere may
be assigned to an additional role, such as incident commander in charge of the emergency or
safety officer, so long as this individual is able to perform assistance or rescue activities without
jeopardizing the safety or health of any firefighter working at the incident.
NFPA 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Health, Safety, and Wellness, 2018
Edition, has similar language as CFR 1910.134)g)(4) to address the issue of two-in/two-out,
stating: the initial stages of the incident where only one crew is operating in the hazardous area
of a working structural fire, a minimum of four individuals shall be required consisting of two
members working as a crew in the hazardous area and two standby members present outside
this hazard area available for assistance or rescue at emergency operations where entry into
the danger area is required.83
NFPA 1500 also speaks to the utilization of the two-out personnel in the context of the health and
safety of the firefighters working at the incident. The assignment of any personnel including the
incident commander, the safety officer, or operations of fire apparatus, shall not be permitted
82. CFR 1910.134 (g) 4
83. NFPA 1500, 2018, 8.8.2.
135
as standby personnel if by abandoning their critical task(s) to assist, or if necessary, perform
rescue, this clearly jeopardizes the safety and health of any firefighter working at the incident.84
In order to meet CFR 1910.134(g)(4), and NFPA 1500, the KFD must utilize two personnel to
commit to interior fire attack while two firefighters remain out of the hazardous area or
immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH) area to form the IRIT, while attack lines are
charged, and a continuous water supply is established. In most cases this will require a minimum
of either two fire suppression units, or an engine and medic unit to commence operations.
However, NFPA 1500 allows for fewer than four personnel under specific circumstances. It states:
Initial attack operations shall be organized to ensure that if on arrival at the emergency scene,
initial attack personnel find an imminent life-threatening situation where immediate action could
prevent the loss of life or serious injury, such action shall be permitted with fewer than four
personnel.85
CFR 1910.134(g)(4) also states that nothing in section (g) is meant to preclude firefighters from
performing emergency rescue activities before an entire team has assembled.86
It is also important to note that the OSHA standard (and NFPA 1710) specifically references
“interior firefighting.” Firefighting activities that are performed from the exterior of the building
are not regulated by this portion of the OSHA standard. However, in the end, the ability to
assemble adequate personnel, along with appropriate apparatus, on the scene of a structure
fire, is critical to operational success and firefighter safety.
FIGURE 4-4: Two-In/Two-Out Interior Firefighting Model
The OSHA requirement has two key provisions that allow considerable flexibility regarding
staffing:
84. NFPA 1500, 2018, 8.8.2.5.
85. NFPA 1500, 2018 8.8.2.10.
86. CFR 190.134, (g).
136
■ One provision specifies that the four personnel who engage in interior firefighting are required
at the incident (assembled) and are not a staffing requirement for the individual responding
unit(s).
■ The second provision is that an exception is provided when crews are performing rescue
operations where there is the potential for serious injury or death of the occupants. In this case
the standard allows the entry of two personnel to conduct the rescue activity without two
firefighters outside immediately available to monitor operations and rescue trapped
firefighters, if necessary.
The KFD responds initially to reported structural fires with no specified minimum number of
personnel. The initial staffing is determined by the number of personnel working, whether all
personnel are available for response at the time of dispatch, and the number of personnel who
respond from surrounding mutual aid departments. Under this response model, the KFD hopes to
provide the minimum number of firefighters on the initial response in order to comply with CFR
1910.134(g)(4), regarding two-in/two-out rules and an initial rapid intervention team (IRIT). In most
cases this will require a minimum of two fire suppression units or an engine and medic unit on
scene to commence operations. In addition, when staffed at lower levels, particularly if there
are one or more incidents already in progress that have one or more medic units and their
personnel committed on other incidents, the KFD will be unable to provide sufficient staffing to
comply with CFR 1910.134—for interior structural firefighting—until the arrival of a responding KFD
chief officer or mutual aid unit.
It was consistently reported to CPSM that the KFD does try to follow the provisions of the OSHA
Two-In/Two-Out regulation regarding waiting to initiate an interior fire attack until four personnel
are assembled when there are no rescues to be made. The department is to be commended
for this adherence.
EFFECTIVE RESPONSE FORCE AND CRITICAL TASKING
Critical tasks are those activities that must be conducted on time and preferably simultaneously
by responders at emergency incidents to control the situation and minimize/stop loss (property
and life-safety). Critical tasking for fire operations is the minimum number of personnel needed
to perform the tasks needed to effectively control and mitigate a fire or other emergency. To be
effective, critical tasking must assign enough personnel so that all identified functions can be
performed simultaneously. However, it is important to note that initial response personnel may
manage secondary support functions once they have completed their primary assignment.
Thus, while an incident may end up requiring a greater commitment of resources or a
specialized response, a properly executed critical tasking assignment will provide adequate
resources to immediately begin bringing the incident under control.
The specific number of people required to perform all the critical tasks associated with an
identified risk or incident type is referred to as an Effective Response Force (ERF). The goal is to
deliver an ERF within a prescribed period. NFPA 1710 provides the benchmarks for effective
response forces.
NFPA 1710 addresses standards for an ERF across several types of occupancies. An effective ERF
is defined as the minimum number of firefighters and equipment that must reach a specific
emergency incident location within a maximum prescribed travel [driving] time. The maximum
prescribed travel time acts as one indicator of resource deployment efficiency.
137
NFPA 1710 provides a staffing deployment model and critical tasking guidelines for four specific
occupancies. These occupancies are:
■ Single-Family Dwelling.
■ Open-Air Strip Mall/Commercial.
■ Garden Style Apartment.
■ High-Rise.
The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) has also established benchmarks regarding
staffing and deployment. CPSE sets standards for agencies desiring accreditation through the
Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI). CFAI uses standards set forth in the
Community Risk Assessment Manual: Standards of Cover, 10th edition, to provide guidance in
staffing and deployment to agencies desiring accreditation through Core Competencies.
Core Competency 2C.4
A critical task analysis of each category and risk class has been conducted to
determine the first due and effective response force capabilities, and a process is
in place to validate and document the results. Core competency 2C.4 requires
that the agency conduct a critical task analysis of each risk category and risk
class to determine the first-due and effective response force capabilities, and to
have a process in place to validate and document the results. The process
considers the number of personnel needed to perform the necessary emergency
scene operations. Completion of the process also helps to identify any gaps in
the agency’s emergency scene practices.
As currently staffed, the KFD will not be able to handle even most fires that occur in one- and
two-family residential occupancies, unless they are limited in size and intensity, without the need
for significant mutual aid assistance. This is particularly true at the department’s lower staffing
levels. Fire incidents in larger structures—multifamily dwellings/apartments, commercial buildings,
factories and warehouses, high-rise buildings—require additional personnel and resources to
successfully mitigate. Critical staffing necessary to successfully mitigate various types of incidents
will be discussed in detail later in this section of the report.
The achievability of the KFD being able to handle any significant structure fire without the need
for significant mutual aid is limited and will most likely remain so, at least for the near future.
Those capabilities will improve in the future should the city implement recommendations
contained within this report to incrementally increase the number of personnel and resources
that are deployed throughout the city. Even in this case, fires occurring when there are few
other incidents in progress that will significantly reduce the immediately available number of
personnel, and the fire department can arrive at the fire incident and take definitive action to
mitigate the situation prior to flashover occurring, will impact how effectively and quickly
incidents can be mitigated. If flashover has occurred, holding the fire to the building of origin is
highly achievable as well.
To effectively respond to and mitigate requests for emergency services, an agency must have a
thorough understanding of its community’s risk factors, both fire and EMS. Once identified and
understood, each category or level of risk is associated with the necessary resources and actions
required to mitigate it. This is accomplished through a critical task analysis. The exercise of
matching operational asset deployments to risk, or critical tasking, considers multiple factors
including national standards, achievement of benchmark performance measures, and the
safety of responders.
138
During fire incidents, to be effective, critical tasking must assign enough personnel so that all
identified functions can be performed simultaneously. However, it is important to note that initial
response personnel may handle secondary support functions once they have completed their
primary assignment. Thus, while an incident may end up requiring a greater commitment of
resources or a specialized response, a properly executed critical task analysis will provide
adequate resources to immediately begin bringing the incident under control.
Regarding the implementation of an ERF and its aggregate effect on fireground operations,
there has been much research done by a number of fire departments on the effects of various
staffing levels. These studies have consistently confirmed that company efficiency and
effectiveness decrease substantially, and injuries increase when company staffing falls below
four personnel. A comprehensive yet scientifically conducted, verified, and validated study
titled Multiphase Study on Firefighter Safety and the Deployment of Resources was performed by
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Worcester Polytechnic Institute
(WPI), in conjunction with the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International
Association of Fire Fighters, and the Center for Public Safety Excellence. For the first time,
quantitative evidence was produced regarding the impact of crew size on accomplishing
critical tasks. Additionally, continual research from UL has provided tactical insights that shed
further light on the needs related to crew size and firefighter safety. This body of research
includes:
■ An April 2010 report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST).
■ An April 2013 report on High-Rise Fireground Field Experiments from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST-HR).
■ A December 2010 report on the Impact of Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and
Contemporary Residential Construction (UL).
■ Additional collaborative efforts such as the Governor’s Island and Spartanburg Burns continue
to expand upon and reinforce the findings of NIST and UL.
As stated, some of these studies’ findings have a direct impact on the exercise of critical tasking.
For example, as UL studied the impact of ventilation on fire behavior, it was able to obtain
empirical data about the effect of water application on fire spread and occupant tenability.
The research clearly indicates that the external application of a fire stream, especially a straight
stream, does not “push fire” or decrease tenability in any adjacent rooms. Therefore, during the
deployment of resources for the critical task of fire attack, consideration must be given to the
option of applying water to the fire from the exterior when able. This approach enables a fire
attack that can begin prior to the establishment of an Initial Rapid Intervention Team (IRIT) as
well as decreases the time to get water on the fire, which has the greatest impact on occupant
survivability.
The NIST studies examined the impact of crew size and stagger on the timing of fireground task
initiation, duration, and completion. Although each study showed crew size as having an impact
on time-to-task, consideration must be given to what tasks were affected and to what extent.
For example, four-person crews operating at a low-hazard structure fire completed all fireground
tasks (on average) 5.1 minutes or 25 percent faster than three-person crews.
■ Four-person firefighting crews were able to complete 22 essential firefighting and rescue tasks
in a typical residential structure 30 percent faster than two-person crews and 25 percent faster
than three-person crews.
139
■ The four-person crews were able to deliver water to a similar sized fire 15 percent faster than
the two-person crews and 6 percent faster than three-person crews, steps that help to reduce
property damage and reduce danger/risks to firefighters. The latter time represents a
34-second difference.
■ Four-person crews were able to complete critical search and rescue operations 30 percent
faster than two-person crews and 6 percent faster than three-person crews. The latter time
represents a 23-second difference. The “rescue time” difference from a four-person to a three-
person crew is seven seconds.
When considering critical tasking for the deployment of an ERF for fire suppression operations, as
currently staffed, the KFD will be unable to handle most incidents—even those involving
residential occupancies (one- and two-family dwellings)—with just its own resources. For most
significant structure incidents, the department will need to utilize resources from surrounding
mutual aid partners.
It is also important to note that the impact of crew size as it relates to high-risk categories is
greater than its low-risk implications and should be considered when staffing units that cover a
greater amount of risk. As KFD’s engine and truck companies are often staffed with just three
personnel (providing there are no ambulance calls in progress), this will ultimately present some
significant operational challenges and concerns (as it does in many other communities that
utilize similar staffing models).
To be clear, there is no Montana or federal requirement that specifies staffing levels on fire
apparatus. The closest thing that approaches a requirement for staffing levels is the OSHA 29
CFR 1910.134 standard that was previously discussed.
From a practical standpoint, staffing engines and ladders with three personnel rather than four
forces the company officer (Captain) to be actively involved in hands-on tasks such as
stretching a line, or raising a ladder, rather than performing size-up and other important initial
fireground actions. Company officers are working supervisors. They form an integral part of their
company, and it is often necessary for them to assume hands-on involvement in operations,
particularly with companies that are minimally staffed, while simultaneously providing oversight
and direction to their personnel. During structure fires and other dangerous technical operations,
it is imperative that these officers accompany, and operate with, their crew to monitor
conditions, provide situation reports, and assess progress toward incident mitigation. During
structure fires they operate inside of the fire building. Company officers need to be able to focus
on the completion of specific tasks that have been assigned to their respective companies, such
as interior fire attack, rescue, ventilation, and/or water supply.
When engine companies are staffed with three rather than four personnel, the officer often
needs to either function as the nozzle person while the other firefighter backs him/her up and
helps with advancing the line, or, if the roles are reversed and the officer is assisting with line
advancement they cannot monitor the conditions at the nozzle—and closest to the fire—as they
should. Ideally, one firefighter should be the nozzle operator, the officer should be right
alongside of, or behind the nozzle, providing direction and evaluating conditions, and the third
firefighter can be further back assisting with advancing the line. This is particularly important for
fires on the second and third floors of buildings where the lines must frequently be advanced up
narrow and winding stairways. When short-staffed in fire conditions such as this, two
companies—which could be the entire on-duty staffing contingent in Kalispell—often must be
deployed to get a single line in service, which can then impact the completion of additional
critical tasks.
140
CPSM advocates structural fire tactics and strategies that are both safe and effective, but
sometimes staffing levels can make that dual goal difficult to achieve. Initiating offensive
operations with fewer than four firefighters will place firefighters at a high level of risk; delaying
operations until additional staffing arrives places occupants in greater danger and can increase
property damage.
Ultimately, overall, on-duty fire department staffing is a local government decision. It is also
important to note again that the OSHA standard (and NFPA 1500/1710/1720) specifically
references “interior firefighting.” Firefighting activities that are performed from the exterior of the
building are not regulated by this portion of the OSHA standard. However, in the end, the ability
to assemble adequate personnel, along with appropriate apparatus to the scene of a structure
fire, is critical to operational success and firefighter safety. How and where personnel and
resources are located, and how quickly they can arrive on scene, play major roles also.
All of these factors must be taken into consideration as Kalispell reaches consensus on the
acceptable community fire safety risk level, affordable levels of expenditure for fire protection,
and appropriate levels of staffing. The city will need to consider the cost-benefit of various
deployment strategies, such as continuing the current staffing and deployment model, or
adopting a modified one based upon options presented within this report.
For KFD, emergency responses are based on caller information provided to dispatchers at the
Flathead Emergency Communication Center; responses depend on the nature and type of call
for service. Since the city has, at most, two staffed fire suppression units on duty at a time, most
fire responses receive an initial response of one or both these units provided there are not
incidents in progress that already have part of the on-duty crew committed. KFD details out its
response procedures through SOP 205 and a response plan in the dispatch center. For structure
fire incidents the following are the normal responses:
■ First Alarm:
□ One- and two-family residential occupancies: All KFD units plus one engine and chief from
Evergreen FD, and one ambulance from Smith Valley FD.
□ Commercial and multifamily occupancies: All KFD units plus one quint and chief from
Evergreen FD, one engine from Whitefish FD, and one ambulance and chief from Smith
Valley FD.
■ Second Alarm:
□ One- and two-family residential occupancies: Page out off-duty personnel—total recall
(non-mandatory), plus one engine and chief from Smith Valley FD, one engine and chief
from Whitefish FD, and Rehab unit and assistant chief from South Kalispell FD.
□ Commercial and multifamily occupancies: Page out off-duty personnel—total recall (non-
mandatory), plus one engine and chief from Whitefish FD, one ladder from West Valley FD,
Bad Rock FD assistant chief, and OES manager.
■ Third Alarm:
□ One- and two-family residential occupancies: One engine and chief from Creston FD, one
engine and chief from Bigfork FD, one engine from Somers FD.
□ Commercial and multi-family occupancies: One engine and chief from Creston FD, one
engine and chief from Bigfork FD, one engine from Somers FD.
141
■ Fourth Alarm:
□ One- and two-family residential occupancies: One engine and chief from Bad Rock FD, and
one engine and chief from Columbia Falls FD.
□ Commercial and multifamily occupancies: One engine and chief from Bad Rock FD, one
engine and chief from Columbia Falls FD, and one engine and chief from Marion FD.
The following table shows the workload of fire responses by number of units arriving at these
incident types during the year studied. This table only includes calls where a unit from the KFD
arrived. In this section, we limit ourselves to calls where a KFD unit arrives.
TABLE 4-2: Fire Calls by Call Type and Number of Arriving KFD Units
Call Type
Number of Units
One Two Three or
More
False alarm 209 4 0
Good intent 35 2 0
Hazard 83 5 2
Outside fire 19 5 1
Public service 230 19 1
Structure fire 14 8 3
Fire Subtotal 590 43 7
Note: Only calls with arriving KFD units were considered. There were 288 calls where a KFD unit recorded an en route time
but no unit recorded an arrival time. This included 30 fire calls.
A more in-depth analysis of the data in the above table tells us:
■ On average, 1.1 units arrived per fire call.
■ For fire calls, one unit arrived 92.2 percent of the time, two units arrived 6.7 percent of the time,
and three or more units arrived 1.1 percent of the time.
■ For outside fire calls, three or more units arrived 4.0 percent of the time.
■ For structure fire calls, three or more units arrived 12.0 percent of the time.
The next table shows the duration of calls by type using four duration categories: less than 30
minutes, 30 minutes to one hour, one to two hours, and more than two hours.
TABLE 4-3: Calls by Type and Duration
Call Type Less than
30 Minutes
30 Minutes
to One Hour
One to Two
Hours
Two or More
Hours
False alarm 179 37 0 1
Good intent 39 4 0 1
Hazard 65 24 6 0
Outside fire 14 8 3 0
Public service 218 37 7 1
Structure fire 8 8 5 5
142
From looking at the data in this table we can determine that:
■ On average, 0.1 fire calls per day lasted more than one hour, so about one every 10 days.
■ A total of 641 fire calls (96 percent) lasted less than one hour, 21 fire calls (three percent)
lasted one to two hours, and eight fire calls (one percent) lasted two or more hours.
■ A total of 22 outside fire calls (88 percent) lasted less than one hour and three outside fire calls
(12 percent) lasted one to two hours.
■ A total of 16 structure fire calls (62 percent) lasted less than one hour. This suggests fires that
were probably more minor in nature, or that the KFD arrived quickly and was able to mitigate
quickly. Keep in mind also that these are fires that meet the NFIRS criterion for structure fires as
they cause damage to the structure itself. There were most likely many other incidents that
were dispatched as a structure fire based upon information received but were ultimately
classified otherwise based upon the situation encountered.
■ Five structure fire calls (19 percent) lasted one to two hours, and five structure fire calls (19
percent) lasted two or more hours. These times indicate more significant structure fires where
the fire department was engaged for an extended period of time.
As already stated, for any given emergency to which KFD responds, there are critical tasks that
must be completed. These tasks can range from the immediate rescue of trapped occupants
within a burning structure to vehicle or water rescue when needed. A set of critical tasks have
been developed in an effort to identify what resources are needed for each incident type. The
following critical task analysis was performed independent of KFD policies; however, a
comparison is provided.
The intent of the risk management process is for the department to develop a standard level of
safety while strategically aligning its resources with requests for service. Thus, the critical tasking
presented herein will consider the ERF in relation to either a low-, moderate-, or high-risk
classification.
The following discussion and tables will outline how critical tasking and assembling an effective
response force is first measured in NFPA 1710, and how the KFD is benchmarked against this
standard for the building types existing in Kalispell. This discussion will cover critical tasking for the
following incident types:
■ Structure Fire–Low Risk.
■ Structure Fire–Moderate Risk.
■ Structure Fire–High Risk.
■ Fire Alarm–Low Risk.
■ Fire Alarm–Moderate Risk.
■ Fire Alarm–High Risk.
KFD utilizes a standard alarm assignment for reported structure fire responses that includes the
initial dispatch of all available on-duty personnel and resources along with the simultaneous
dispatch of mutual aid resources as described previously. This means that an initial response to
this type of incident includes the following:
■ One- or two-family residential occupancies: two engines, one ladder/quint, one ambulance,
three chief officers.
143
■ Commercial and multifamily residential occupancies: two engines, two ladders/quints, one
ambulance, four chief officers.
The number of personnel this response places on scene varies depending upon the staffing on
duty in Kalispell that day, whether any other incidents are in progress, and the number of
personnel responding on mutual aid resources.
If the alarm is upgraded to a second alarm or greater the KFD relies primarily on mutual aid
resources (except for personnel returning to work on a recall), whose reliability cannot be
guaranteed.
The initial full alarm assignment (ERF) to a structure fire in a typical 2,000 square-foot, two-story,
single-family dwelling without a basement and with no exposures must provide for a minimum of
16 members (17 if an aerial device is used). The following table outlines the critical task matrix,
and the subsequent figure illustrates it.
TABLE 4-4: Structure Fire: Single-Family Dwelling, Low-Risk
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 1
Continuous Water Supply/Pump Operator 1
Fire Attack via Two Handlines 4
Hydrant Hook-Up, Forcible Entry, Utilities 2
Primary Search and Rescue 2
Ground Ladders and Ventilation 2
Aerial Operator (if Aerial is Used) 1
Establishment of an IRIT (Initial Rapid
Intervention Team) 2
Effective Response Force 16/17
KFD Initial Response Provided 14*
Note: * Assumes all responding fire units are staffed with three personnel.
These tasks meet the minimum requirements of NFPA 1710 for the initial full alarm assignment to a
typical low-risk, 2,000 square-foot, two-story residential structure. These are the proverbial “bread
and butter” structural fire incidents that fire departments respond to, and which are, by far, the
most common type of structure fire. Personnel requirements for fires involving large, more
complex structures such as commercial facilities or multifamily residential occupancies will
require a significantly greater commitment of personnel.
This serves as a good benchmark for critical tasking that needs to be accomplished to mitigate
the most common type of structural fire incident, which is the single-family dwelling. The next
figure illustrates how the Effective Response Force integrates simultaneously to accomplish these
fireground goals.
144
FIGURE 4-5: Initial Deployment of Firefighting Personnel/ERF Recommendation:
Single-family Dwelling
It should be emphasized that the suggested deployment of personnel for the effective response
force is the minimum number of personnel required. Conversely, experienced chief officers know
that the actual personnel need for these incidents are often higher depending upon the severity
of the incident. In addition, a single fire even in a small single-family dwelling will end up stripping
the city of all available fire and EMS resources. However, this is fairly common in smaller cities
such as Kalispell and does not happen with great frequency.
It should also be noted at this point that at least a portion of the housing stock in Kalispell does
not fit into this type of “typical” residential structure. Our observation was that many of the
detached residential units, particularly in the older parts of the city, are larger and multistory,
occupancies. In these types of structures, the fire challenges are going to be much more
complex and conducive to rapid fire spread through such areas as attics and basements. Fire
extension between closely spaced, wood-frame dwellings is also a significant concern. For this
reason, a percentage of Kalispell’s residential occupancies would be more in the moderate-risk
category.
■ The initial full alarm assignment (ERF) to a structural fire in a typical 1,200 square-foot
apartment within a three-story, garden-style apartment building should provide for a minimum
of 27 members (28 if an aerial device is used).
■ The initial full alarm assignment (ERF) to a structural fire in a typical open-air strip center
ranging from 13,000 square feet to 196,000 square feet in size should provide for a minimum of
27 members (28 if an aerial device is used).
The following table outlines the critical tasking matrix for this type of fire. This can also be typed
as a commercial building fire response.
145
TABLE 4-5: Structure Fire – Moderate Risk
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 2
2 – Independent Water Supply Lines/Pump Operators 2
Fire Attack via Three Handlines 6
Support Firefighter for each Handline 3
2 - Search and Rescue Teams 4
2 - Ground Ladders and Ventilation Teams 4
Aerial Operator (if Aerial is Used) 1
Rapid Intervention Team (1 Officer/3 Firefighters) 4
EMS/Medical 2
Effective Response Force 27/28
KFD Initial Response Provided 18*
Note: * Assumes all responding fire units are staffed with three personnel.
The following table identifies critical tasking for fires involving high-risk structures such as hospitals,
nursing homes, and assisted living facilities.
TABLE 4-6: Structure Fire – High Risk
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 2
2 – Independent Water Supply Lines/Pump Operators 2
Investigation/Initial Fire Attack Line 3
Backup Line 3
Secondary Attack Line 3
3 - Search/Rescue Teams 6
2 – Ground Ladder and Ventilation teams 4
Water Supply/Fire Department Connection 2
Aerial Operators (if Aerials are Used) 2
Safety/Accountability 2
Rapid Intervention Team (1 Officer/3 Firefighters) 4
EMS/Medical 4
Effective Response Force 35/37
KFD Initial Response Provided 18*
Note: * Assumes all responding fire units are staffed with three personnel.
It should be stressed that the responses of personnel that CPSM is illustrating based upon the
recommended benchmark standards to establish an ERF based upon the hazard of the
occupancy type (low, medium, and high hazard) are intended for instances where the caller(s)
is reporting visible smoke or fire within the building. As part of a risk management strategy, for
incidents within structures such as an appliance, a sparking electrical outlet, an odor, or smoke,
etc., consideration should be given to the initial dispatch of a “Tactical Box” comprised of:
146
■ 2 engines.
■ 1 ladder truck.
■ 1 command officer.
If additional information is received indicating an active fire in progress, the assignment can
then be upgraded to a “Full Box.” While achieving this level of ERF is not possible without the use
of automatic/mutual aid, with the future implementation of recommendations for staffing and
deployment contained within this report, the KFD should be able to do so as an intermediate to
long-term goal.
The KFD dispatches a single engine company to fire alarm activations in residential
occupancies, and two engines or one engine and one quint to those in commercial buildings
and multifamily occupancies. These types of responses need to be considered in the context of
risk assessment and management. On the one hand, consideration must be given to the
potential risks, hazards, and even investigative complexity associated with various types of
occupancies. Conversely, data and experience show that these system activations are rarely for
an actual fire incident, and of those that are, they often backed up by a phone call reporting a
fire. The following tables provide comparisons between KFD practice and recommended
responses.
TABLE 4-7: Fire Alarm System – Low Risk
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 1
Investigation 3
Effective Response Force 4
KFD Response Provided 3
Based upon needed personnel for an ERF for a low-risk fire alarm system, consideration should
be given to maintaining the current initial response of:
■ 1 engine.
TABLE 4-8: Fire Alarm System – Moderate Risk (Apartment/Commercial)
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 1
Pump Operator 1
Investigation 4
Forcible Entry/Ventilation (if necessary) 2
Effective Response Force 8
KFD Response Provided 6
Note: * Assumes all responding fire units are staffed with three personnel.
Based upon needed personnel for an ERF for a moderate risk fire alarm system, in the future,
consideration should be given to revising the current initial response to:
147
■ 1 engine.
■ 1 ladder/quint.
■ 1 command officer.
TABLE 4-9: Fire Alarm System – High-Risk
Critical Task Needed Personnel
Incident Command 1
Pump Operator 1
Water Supply/Fire Department Connection 1
Investigation 4
Search and Rescue (if necessary) 2
Annunciator Panel 2
Effective Response Force 11
K Response Provided 6
Note: * Assumes all responding fire units are staffed with three personnel.
Based upon needed personnel for an ERF for a high-risk fire alarm system, in the future, the KFD
should consider an initial response of:
■ 2 engines.
■ 1 ladder/quint.
■ 1 command officer.
Although risk management processes and appropriate call screening are important parts of
determining the appropriate number of resources that should be initially dispatched to various
types of emergency incidents, it is also important that enough personnel and resources be
initially available to handle all critical tasks in a timely manner should they need to be
performed. For this reason, it is the widespread practice in the fire service to send multiple
resources to incidents that ultimately end up not being utilized if the incident turns out to be a
minor one that is easily mitigated. Even today, within reason, this remains a prudent approach.
It is important to remember that the effective
response force personnel needs contained in NFPA
1710 are the minimum number of personnel that are
needed to be able to accomplish the critical tasking
identified. They are not all-inclusive as to personnel
needs. For instance, this tasking provides for two
initial attack lines, not three, which are often needed
for multistory dwellings. It also includes just two
personnel on each line, which requires the officer to
either be on the nozzle or advancing the line as a
back-up rather than monitoring conditions,
supervising the application of the water, and the
coordination of other activities.
They may also include other clarifying factors. For
instance, the low-hazard structure fire is based on a
fire in a typical 2,000 square-foot, two-story, single-
148
family dwelling without a basement and with no exposures. It does not consider factors such as
lightweight construction, and the fact that in many parts of the country homes have basements
and often have multiple exposures close by. In addition, many of the new homes being
constructed today are much larger than 2,000 square feet. Housing types such as townhouses
and condominiums are also gaining popularity as “single-family” dwellings. All of these factors
contribute to the knowledge that many experienced chief officers possess that the actual
personnel needs are often higher depending upon the severity of the incident.
Fires involving large, more complex structures such as commercial facilities or multifamily
residential occupancies will require a significantly greater commitment of personnel, which is
acknowledged in NFPA 1710. For other types of specialized operations that can include
incidents such as building collapses, hazardous materials incidents, technical rescue
emergencies, maritime vessel fires, train derailments or fires, and aircraft incidents, the personnel
needs can be very significant with a large number of personnel needed to support the technical
response personnel working to mitigate the incident.
For these reasons, many fire departments have adopted response protocols that dictate the
initial dispatch and response of a full “box” to all these types of incidents. A common
configuration of this type of initial dispatch is:
■ 4 engines.
■ 2 ladders/quints.
■ 1 rescue truck.
■ 1 EMS unit.
■ 2 command/chief officers.
Depending upon whether the fire suppression units are staffed with three or four personnel this
response provides an initial response force of between 25 and 32 personnel. Additional
personnel such as special operations personnel, multiple EMS units, or safety officers are
sometimes also included in the initial dispatch and response depending upon the nature of the
incident and the department’s resources.
As fire departments in growing communities increase in size, their emergency scene operational
structure and capabilities must expand also to keep pace with the increasing number of
incidents, complexity of those incidents, and the availability of additional resources for incident
mitigation. Generally, there are multiple agreed-upon levels of command qualification for fire
and rescue service operations:
■ Level 1 – Initial.
■ Level 2 – Intermediate.
■ Level 3 – Advanced.
■ Level 4 – Strategic.
In CPSM’s view, at the present time the KFD has Level 1 capabilities, which is the initial arriving
officer on an incident, and Level 3, which is handled by the Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief.
It is mission critical that every emergency incident, no matter how small or large, has an Incident
Commander (IC) who is the boss. In many cases, the company officer (Captain in the KFD) fulfills
this role. On larger incidents, the Fire Chief and/or Assistant Fire Chief assume this role. The
149
Incident Commander is responsible for the overall management of the incident. The safety,
welfare and accountability of personnel are taken into consideration when achieving the
following incident priorities:
■ Life safety.
■ Incident stabilization.
■ Property conservation.
■ Environment protection.
The Incident Command System (ICS) is used to facilitate the completion of tactical priorities. The
IC is the person who drives ICS towards that end. The IC is responsible for building an ICS
organization that matches the organizational needs of the incident to achieve the completion
of the tactical priorities for the incident.
The functions of command define standard activities that are performed by the IC to achieve
tactical priorities. The functions of command at a structure fire include:
■ Assume and announce command.
■ Rapidly evaluate the situation (size up).
■ Establish and announce the location of an effective operating position (Incident Command
Post).
■ Initiate, maintain, and control the communication plan.
■ Identify the overall strategy, develop an Incident Action Plan, and assign companies and
personnel to include RIC, consistent with plans and standard operating guidelines.
■ Request appropriate resources, when necessary.
■ Ensure accountability of all resources utilizing ICS 201 or other tactical worksheets.
■ Ensure the utilization of a Time Clock when appropriate.
■ Develop an effective ICS organization using divisions and/or groups to maintain the span of
control.
■ Provide tactical priorities and strategic objectives.
■ Coordinate activities with other agencies and cooperators (Law Enforcement, Ambulance,
Utilities, Building Department, etc.)
■ Continuously assess incident conditions and review, evaluate, and revise the Incident Action
Plan as needed.
■ Provide for the continuity, transfer, and termination of command.
At least initially, the IC is responsible for all these functions. As command is transferred, so is the
responsibility for these functions.
One of the IC’s primary duties is to determine the life safety profile of the incident and apply the
most appropriate level of risk to first responders. The IC should integrate principles of risk
management into the functions of command. Risk management involves the identification and
evaluation of risk, and the prioritization of actions followed by coordinated application of
resources to minimize, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of unfortunate events
150
or to maximize the realization of opportunities. Risk management principles should be employed
by supervisory personnel at all levels of the ICS. It must be remembered when evaluating risk that
not only the severity of the risk but also the frequency of occurrence is of concern. High-risk
events that occur infrequently pose the greatest threat to responders because of the likelihood
they will have limited experience in dealing with such events.
There are a variety of actions that can be taken by the IC for management of emergency
incident risk. Together these actions provide a solid framework for protecting responders from
the risks involved in emergency operations. These actions include (but are not limited to):
■ Have a well-defined Incident Action Plan that incorporates contingencies.
■ Evaluate the situation and risk (size-up).
■ Utilize full personal protective clothing.
■ Provide effective incident management (Company Unity, Unity of Command, Appropriate
Span of Control).
■ Ensure effective communications.
■ Establish safety procedures and utilize Safety Officers.
■ Ensure adequate resources are available.
■ Assign Rapid Intervention Crew/Company(ies).
■ Provide for incident medical needs.
■ Provide for rest and rehabilitation.
■ Regularly evaluate the situation for changing conditions.
One of the most critical actions in managing risk is the evaluation of the situation and risks
involved. Critical indicators that support gaining situational awareness and evaluating risk must
be constantly evaluated. Beyond the specific emphasis on risk management and safety, the
role of incident commander is a dynamic position and highly stressful position that has numerous
critical responsibilities that must be handled simultaneously and, in a time, critical manner.
While the KFD normally has two chief officers responding on reported structure fires (provided
they are available), which provides the Level 3 Advanced command level, in the future CPSM
believes that the city will need to consider the implementation of a Level 2 Intermediate
command level officer. This would be a designated shift commander. This concept is developed
later in this section.
A critical component of the incident command system is the establishment of the role of safety
officer to monitor conditions at fires and emergency incident scenes to ensure that appropriate
safety procedures are being followed. The incident safety officer is an important member of the
incident command team. The safety officer works directly under and with the incident
commander to help recognize and manage the risks that personnel take at emergencies. These
include:
■ Incident recon.
■ Assess the risk/benefit of operations.
■ Assess and address safety concerns on the incident scene.
■ Communicate and report safety issues to command.
151
■ Intervene as necessary to provide safety.
During larger-scale incidents, the safety officer reviews the incident action plan and specific
details of the safety plan. As appropriate, the safety officer confirms that a safety plan is in
effect, reviews it, and provides recommendations. The incident commander may request that
the safety officer develop a proposed safety plan and recommendations for command.
CPSM was informed that the role of Safety Officer is usually filled as soon as possible on working
fires and other significant incidents.
Establishing an ERF for medical emergencies is significantly less labor intensive than it is for fire
incidents. NFPA 1710 provides guidance regarding staffing levels for units responding to EMS
incidents; however, the provision does not specify a minimum staffing level for EMS response
units. Instead, section 5.3.32 of the standard states: “EMS staffing requirements shall be based on
the minimum levels needed to provide patient care and member safety.” It further recommends
that resources should be deployed to provide “for the arrival of a first responder with AED within
a 240-second travel time to 90 percent of the incidents,” and, “when provided, the fire
department’s EMS for providing ALS shall be deployed to provide for the arrival of an ALS unit
within a 480-second travel time to 90 percent of the incidents provided a first responder with
AED or BLS unit arrived in 240 seconds or less travel time.”
EMS calls are typically managed with fewer personnel, and the majority of EMS calls can be
handled with a single ambulance staffed with two personnel. During the call-screening process
those calls that require additional personnel are typically identified at the dispatch level and
additional personnel can be assigned when needed. These types of incidents could include
cardiac and respiratory arrest, unconscious persons, and other incidents where the initial call
seems to indicate a severe and imminent threat to life. NFPA 1710 suggests for these types of
emergencies that “personnel deployed to ALS emergency responses shall include a minimum of
two members trained at the emergency medical technician-paramedic level and two members
trained at the emergency medical technician-basic level arriving on scene within the
established travel time.” However, these types of emergencies constitute a small percentage of
overall EMS incidents as identified herein.
FIGURE 4-6: Typical EMS ERF
Left = Advanced Life Support (ALS) Right = Basic Life Support (BLS)
152
Critical tasks by specific call type for fire responses to EMS incidents are not always as well
defined as those critical tasks in the fire discipline. Notwithstanding, critical tasking in EMS is
typical of that in the fire service in that there are certain critical tasks that need to be completed
either in succession or simultaneously. EMS on-scene service delivery is based primarily on a
focused scene assessment, patient assessment, and then followed by the appropriate basic and
advanced clinical care through established medical protocols. EMS critical tasking is typically
developed (in fire-based EMS Standards of Cover documents) in accordance with the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS),
as:
■ Basic Life Support (BLS).
■ Advanced Life Support, Level 1 (ALS1).
■ Advanced Life Support, Level 2 (ALS2).
■ Specialty Care Transport (SCT).
Initial fire department first responder intervention is generally not needed for either BLS- or SCT-
type incidents unless there is an extended delay in the arrival of an ambulance. The current
recommendations also do not include fire department response for ALS1 calls; however, that is
more a matter of local level of service determination as these types of incidents can be life-
threatening in certain instances.
The majority of the incidents the KFD responds to are medical emergencies and result in the
dispatch of the closest available fire department unit along with an ambulance if the
ambulance is not closest. The following figure illustrates one model for EMS response based upon
call type (severity).
FIGURE 4-7: Typical EMS Response Matrix/Algorithm
153
KFD FIRE RESPONSE TIMES
Response times are typically the primary measurement for evaluating fire and EMS services.
Response times can be used as a benchmark to determine how well a fire department is
currently performing, to help identify response trends, and to predict future operational needs.
Achieving the quickest and safest response times possible should be a fundamental goal of
every fire department.
However, the actual impact of a speedy response time is limited to very few incidents. For
example, in a full cardiac arrest, analysis shows that successful outcomes are rarely achieved if
basic life support (CPR) is not initiated within four to six minutes of the onset. However, cardiac
arrests occur very infrequently; on average they are 1 percent to 1.5 percent of all EMS
incidents.87 There are also other EMS incidents that are truly life-threatening, and the time of
response can clearly impact the outcome. These involve cardiac and respiratory emergencies,
full drownings, obstetrical emergencies, allergic reactions, electrocutions, and severe trauma
(often caused by gunshot wounds, stabbings, and severe motor vehicle accidents, etc.). Again,
the frequencies of these types of calls are limited.
An important factor in the whole response time question is what we term “detection time.” This is
the time it takes to detect a fire or a medical situation and notify 911 to initiate the response. In
many instances, particularly at night or when automatic detection systems (fire sprinklers and
smoke detectors) are not present or inoperable, the detection process can be extended. Fires
that go undetected and are allowed to expand in size become more destructive and are
difficult to extinguish.
For the purpose of this analysis, response time is a product of three components: dispatch time,
turnout time, and travel time.
■ Dispatch time is the time interval that begins when the alarm is received at the initial public
safety answering point (PSAP) or communications center and ends when the response
information begins to be transmitted via voice and/or electronic means to the emergency
response facility or emergency response units or personnel in the field.
■ Turnout time is the time interval that begins when the notification process to emergency
response facilities and emergency response personnel and units begins by an audible alarm
and/or visual announcement and ends at the beginning point of travel time. The fire
department has the greatest control over these segments of the total response time.
■ Travel time is the time interval that initiates when the emergency response unit is actually
moving in response to the incident and ends when the unit arrives at the scene.
■ Response time, also known as total response time, is the time interval that begins when the call
is received by the primary dispatch center and ends when the dispatched unit(s) arrives on
the scene of the incident to initiate action.
For this study, and unless otherwise indicated, response times and travel times measure the first
arriving unit only.
87. Myers, Slovis, Eckstein, Goodloe et al. (2007).” Evidence-based Performance Measures for Emergency
Medical Services System: A Model for Expanded EMS Benchmarking.” Pre-hospital Emergency Care.
154
According to NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression
Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career
Departments, 2020 Edition:
■ Alarm processing time or dispatch time should be less than or equal to 60 seconds 90 percent
of the time.
■ Turnout time, which is under the control of the fire department, should be less than or equal to
60 seconds for EMS incidents, and 80 seconds (1.33 minutes) for fire and special operations
90 percent of the time. As noted above, turnout time is the segment of total response time
that the fire department has the most ability to control through employee behavior and
station layout (time to travel by foot from day/night areas to apparatus) primarily.
■ Travel time shall be:
□ Less than or equal to 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company to a fire suppression
incident 90 percent of the time.
□ Less than or equal to 360 seconds for the second arriving engine company to a fire
suppression incident 90 percent of the time.
□ The initial first alarm assignment should be assembled on scene in 480 seconds, 90 percent
of the time for low/medium hazards, and 610 seconds for high-rise or high hazards.
For EMS incidents, the standard (NFPA 1710) is less than or equal to 240 seconds for the first
arriving engine company with automated external defibrillator (AED) or higher-level capability,
and 480 seconds or less travel time of an Advanced Life Support (ALS) unit at an EMS incident
where the service is provided by the fire department provided a first responder with an AED or
basic life support unit arrived in 240 seconds or less travel time.
It should be noted that the NFPA 1710 response time criterion is a nationally accepted
benchmark for service delivery but not necessarily a CPSM recommendation. However, CPSM
was informed that the City of Kalispell desires to meet the NFPA 1710 recommended
benchmarks as much as possible and that maintaining acceptable response times are an
important priority for the city’s leaders.
The following figures provide: 1) an overview of response time performance and identifies
responsibility for key components of the emergency communications center and the fire and
rescue department, and 2) provides an overview of the fire department incident cascade of
events.
§ § §
155
FIGURE 4-8: Response Time Performance Measures
FIGURE 4-9: Incident Cascade of Events
Regarding response times for fire incidents, the criterion is linked to the concept of “flashover.”
This is the state at which super-heated gases from a fire are released rapidly, causing the fire to
burn freely, and become so volatile that the fire reaches an explosive state (simultaneous
ignition of all the combustible materials in a room). In this situation, usually after an extended
period (often eight to twelve minutes after ignition but at times as quickly as five to seven
minutes), and a combination of the right conditions (fuel and oxygen), the fire expands rapidly
156
and is much more difficult to contain. When the fire does reach this extremely hazardous state,
initial firefighting forces are often overwhelmed, larger and more destructive fire occurs, the fire
escapes the room and possibly even the building of origin, and significantly more resources are
required to affect fire control and extinguishment.
Flashover occurs more quickly and more frequently today and is caused at least in part by the
introduction of significant quantities of plastic- and foam-based products into homes and
businesses (e.g., furnishings, mattresses, bedding, plumbing and electrical components, home
and business electronics, decorative materials, insulation, and structural components). These
materials ignite and burn quickly and produce extreme heat and toxic smoke.
NFPA 1710 outlines recommended organization and deployment of operations by career, and
primarily career, fire, and rescue organizations.88 It is the benchmark standard that the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security utilizes when evaluating applications for staffing grants under
the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant program.
As a benchmark, paragraph 4.1.2.1(3) of NFPA 1710 recommends the first arriving engine at a
fire suppression incident have a travel time of 240 seconds or less. Paragraph 4.1.2.1(4)
recommends that other than for a high-rise incident, the entire initial response of personnel be
on scene within eight minutes (480 seconds) travel time. It is also important to keep in mind that
once units arrive on scene, they will need to get set up to commence operations. NFPA 1710
recommends that units be able to commence an initial attack within two minutes of arrival, 90
percent of the time.
Although trying to reach the NFPA benchmark for travel time may be laudable, the question is,
at what cost? What is the evidence that supports such recommendations? NFPA 1710’s travel
times are established for two primary reasons: (1) the fire propagation curve; and (2) sudden
cardiac arrest, where brain damage and permanent brain death occurs in four to six minutes.
The following figure shows the fire propagation curve relative to fire being confined to the room
of origin or spreading beyond it and the percentage of destruction of property by the fire.
§ § §
88. NFPA 1710 is a nationally recognized standard, but it has not been adopted as a mandatory regulation
by the federal government or the State of Montana. It is a valuable resource for establishing and
evaluating agency performance.
157
FIGURE 4-10: Fire Propagation Curve
Source: John C. Gerard and A. Terry Jacobsen, "Reduced Staffing: At What Cost?" Fire Service Today (September 1981),
15–21.
According to fire service educator Clinton Smoke, the fire propagation curve establishes that
temperature rise and time within in a room on fire corresponds with property destruction and
potential loss of life if present.89 At approximately the eight- to ten-minute mark of fire
progression, the fire flashes over (due to superheating of room contents and other combustibles)
and extends beyond the room of origin, thus increasing proportionately the destruction to
property and potential endangerment of life. The ability to quickly deploy adequate fire staff
prior to flashover thus limits the fire’s extension beyond the room or area of origin.
Regarding the risk of flashover, the authors of an International Association of Firefighters (IAFF)
report conclude:
Clearly, an early aggressive and offensive initial interior attack on a working
structural fire results in greatly reduced loss of life and property damage.
Consequently, given that the progression of a structural fire to the point of
"flashover" (the very rapid spreading of the fire due to super-heating of room
contents and other combustibles) generally occurs in less than 10 minutes, two of
the most important elements in limiting fire spread are the quick arrival of
sufficient numbers of personnel and equipment to attack and extinguish the fire
as close to the point of its origin as possible.90
The following figure illustrates the time progression of a fire from inception through flashover.
Flashover occurs at eight to ten minutes (or less dependent on fuel), allowing the fire to extend
beyond the room of origin. The time versus products of combustion curve shows activation times
and effectiveness of residential sprinklers (approximately one minute), commercial sprinklers
(four minutes), flashover (eight to ten minutes), and firefighters applying first water to the fire
after notification, dispatch, response, and set up (ten minutes). It also illustrates that the fire
89. Clinton Smoke, Company Officer, 2nd ed. (Clifton Park, NY: Delmar, 2005).
90. Safe Fire Fighter Staffing: Critical Considerations, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC: International Association of
Fire Fighters), 5.
158
department’s response time to the fire is one of the only aspects of the timeline that the fire
department can exert direct control over.
FIGURE 4-11: Fire Growth from Inception to Flashover91
EMS response times are measured differently than fire service response times. Where the fire
service uses NFPA 1710 and 1720 as response time benchmarking documents, EMS’ focus is and
should be directed to the evidence-based research relationship between clinical outcomes and
response times. Much of the current research suggests response times have little impact on
clinical outcomes outside of a small segment of call types. These include cerebrovascular
accidents (stroke), injury or illness compromising the respiratory system, injury or illness
compromising the cardiovascular system to include S-T segment elevation emergencies, and
certain obstetrical emergencies. Each requires rapid response times, rapid on-scene treatment
and packaging for transport, and rapid transport to the hospital.
Paragraph 4.1.2.1(7) of NFPA 1710 recommends that for EMS incidents a fire unit with first
responder or higher-level trained personnel and equipped with an AED should arrive on scene
within four minutes of travel time (time after call is processed, dispatched, and the unit turns out).
An advanced life support (ALS) unit should arrive on scene within eight minutes travel time,
provided the fire department responded first with first responder or higher-level trained personnel
and equipped with an AED. According the NFPA 1710, “This requirement is based on
experience, expert consensus, and science. Many studies note the role of time and the delivery
of early defibrillation in patient survival due to heart attacks and cardiac arrest, which are the
most time-critical, resource-intensive medical emergency events to which fire departments
respond.”
The next figure illustrates the chance of survival from the onset of cardiac arrest, largely due to
ventricular fibrillation in terms of minutes without emergency defibrillation delivered by the public
91. Source: Northern Illinois Fire Sprinkler Advisory Board.
159
or emergency responders. The chance of survival has not changed over time since this graphic
was published by the American Heart Association in 2000.
FIGURE 4-12: Cardiac Arrest Survival Probability by Minute
Typically, a low percentage of 9-1-1 patients have time-sensitive and advanced life support
(ALS) needs. But, for those patients that do, time can be a critical issue of morbidity and
mortality. For the remainder of those calling 9-1-1 for a medical emergency, though they may
not have a medical necessity, they still expect rapid customer service. Response times for
patients and their families are often the most important measurement of the EMS department.
Regardless of the service delivery model, appropriate response times are more than a clinical
issue; they are also a customer service issue and should not be ignored.
In addition, a true emergency is when an illness or injury places a person’s health or life in serious
jeopardy and treatment cannot be delayed. Examples include severe trauma with
cardiovascular system compromise, difficulty breathing, chest pain with S-T segment elevation
(STEMI), a head injury, or ingestion of a toxic substance.92 The next figure illustrates the out-of-
hospital chain of survival for a stroke emergency, which is a series of actions that, when put in
motion, reduce the mortality of a stroke emergency.
FIGURE 4-13: Cerebrovascular Emergency (Stroke) Chain of Survival
Source: https://nhcps.com/lesson/acls-acute-stroke-care/
92. Mills-Peninsula Health Blog, Bruce Wapen, MD.
160
If a person is experiencing severe pain, that is also an indicator of an emergency. Again, the
frequencies of these types of calls are limited as compared to the routine, low-priority EMS
incident responses. In some cases, these emergencies often make up no more than 5 percent of
all EMS calls.93
Cardiac arrest is one emergency for which EMS response times were initially built around.
Science tells us that the brain begins to die without oxygenated blood flow at the four- to six-
minute mark. Without immediate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and rapid defibrillation,
the chances of survival diminish rapidly at the cessation of breathing and heart pumping
activity. For every minute without CPR and/or defibrillation, chances of survival decrease 7 to 10
percent. Further, only 10 percent of victims who suffer cardiac arrest outside of the hospital
survive.94
The following figure illustrates the out-of-hospital chain of survival, which is a series of actions that,
when put in motion, reduce the mortality of sudden cardiac arrest. Adequate EMS response
times coupled with community and public access defibrillator programs potentially can impact
the survival rate of sudden cardiac arrest victims by deploying early CPR, early defibrillation, and
early advanced life support care provided in the prehospital setting.
FIGURE 4-14: Sudden Cardiac Arrest Chain of Survival
From: “Out of Hospital Chain of Survival,”
http://cpr.heart.org/AHAECC/CPRAndECC/AboutCPRFirstAid/CPRFactsAndStats/UCM_475731_Out-of-hospital-Chain-of-
Survival.jsp
The primary focus of the following part of this section is the dispatch and response time of the first
arriving units for calls responded to with lights and sirens (Code 3).
In this analysis, which covers the one-year time period from January 1, 2022, thru December 31,
2022, CPSM included all calls within the City of Kalispell to which at least one non-administrative
unit arrived. However, calls with a total response time exceeding 30 minutes were excluded.
Finally, we focused on units that had complete time stamps, that is, units with all components
recorded, so that we could calculate each segment of response time. In this analysis, calls with
“1-High,” “2-Structure,” and “3-Medium” priority levels were identified as emergency calls.
Based on the methodology described above, for the 4,293 calls in the studied period, the data
analysis team eliminated 319 canceled calls, 237 mutual aid calls, 105 non-emergency calls, 69
calls where no units recorded a valid on-scene time, and 60 calls with a total response time
93. www.firehouse.com/apparatus/article/10545016/operations-back-to-basics-true-emergency-and-due-
regard
94. American Heart Association. A Race Against the Clock, Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest. 2014
161
exceeding 30 minutes. As a result, in this section, a total of 3,503 calls are included in the
analysis.
The following table provides the average and 90th percentile dispatch, turnout, travel, and total
response times for the first arriving unit to each call in Kalispell’s response area. The 90th
percentile measurement is a more conservative and stricter measure of total response time.
Simply explained, for 90 percent of calls, the first unit arrived within a specified time, and if
measured, the second and third units. For example, the table shows an overall 90th percentile
response time of 14.3 minutes, which means that 90 percent of the time a call had a response
time of no more than 14.3 minutes.
TABLE 4-10: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by
Call Type (Minutes)
Call Type Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min.
Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
Breathing difficulty 1.8 1.5 5.3 8.6 3.0 2.6 8.2 11.9
Cardiac and stroke 1.9 1.6 5.2 8.8 2.8 2.4 8.2 12.6
Fall and injury 2.3 1.6 6.1 9.9 3.6 2.5 9.9 14.4
Illness and other 2.7 1.5 5.9 10.0 4.7 2.5 9.6 15.0
MVA 2.4 1.6 4.8 8.8 4.4 2.6 7.0 12.5
OD* 3.3 1.8 6.1 11.2 6.8 2.8 10.3 17.9
Seizure and UNC** 2.0 1.4 5.3 8.7 3.3 2.3 8.5 12.4
EMS Subtotal 2.4 1.5 5.7 9.6 3.9 2.5 9.2 14.0
False alarm 1.8 2.0 6.6 10.4 2.6 3.5 9.8 14.0
Good intent 2.0 1.8 5.6 9.4 2.9 2.7 9.4 13.5
Hazard 2.3 1.8 6.8 11.0 3.9 3.0 10.7 16.5
Outside fire 2.0 1.8 6.3 10.2 3.3 3.4 10.5 14.5
Public service 2.4 1.9 6.7 11.0 4.0 3.0 11.4 16.9
Structure fire 1.8 1.7 5.0 8.5 3.2 3.2 7.2 12.3
Fire Subtotal 2.1 1.9 6.5 10.6 3.5 3.2 10.4 15.3
Total 2.3 1.6 5.8 9.7 3.9 2.6 9.6 14.3
Observations and analysis of the above table tells us:
■ The average dispatch time for all calls was 2.3 minutes.
■ The average turnout time for all calls was 1.6 minutes.
■ The average travel time for all calls was 5.8 minutes.
■ The average total response time for all calls was 9.7 minutes.
■ The average total response time was 9.6 minutes for EMS and 10.6 minutes for fire calls.
■ The average total response time was 10.2 minutes for outside fires and 8.5 minutes for structure
fires.
■ The table shows an overall 90th percentile response time of 14.3 minutes, which means that 90
percent of the time a call had a total response time of no more than 14.3 minutes.
162
■ Overall 90th percentile dispatch time was 3.9 minutes. This included 3.9 minutes for EMS
incidents, and for fire calls was 3.5 minutes. Calls for overdoses were 6.8 minutes. These times
are well above the NFPA benchmark standard of 60 seconds 90 percent of the time. This
situation is inadequate and needs to be addressed. However, this part of the response time
equation is out of the control of the KFD.
■ Overall 90th percentile turnout time was 2.6 minutes. For EMS calls the time was 2.5 minutes,
nearly triple the NFPA recommended benchmark. For fire calls the time was 3.2 minutes, more
than double the benchmark standard. Remember, this is the one aspect of total response time
the fire department has the most direct impact on.
■ Aggregate fire and EMS 90th percentile travel time was 9.6 minutes, more than double the
NFPA 1710 benchmark. Both fire (10.4 minutes) and EMS (9.2) travel times are well above the
recommended NFPA benchmark of 240 seconds. Travel times are dictated by the road
network and accessibility to local streets, time of day when traffic congestion is heaviest,
weather, and station location with respect to the incident.
■ The 90th percentile total response time for all calls was 14.3 minutes, more than double the
NFPA 1710 benchmarks of 6.0 (EMS incidents) and 6.33 (fire incidents) minutes, respectively.
For fire, the aggregate total response time was 15.3 minutes, while for EMS calls it was 14.0
minutes. Both of these are inadequate and need to be addressed. Other than station
location(s) and turnout time, this is out of the control of the KFD. However, as will be illustrated
in the next part of this section, the current KFD station configuration does not support the
extended response times found in the data. Conversely, the implementation of
recommendations contained within this report on staffing, deployment, and the addition of a
third station should all assist with improving these response times.
■ The 90th percentile response time was 14.5 minutes for outside fires and 12.3 minutes for
structure fires.
Response Metrics and Response Time Recommendations:
■ The KFD should work with the Flathead County Emergency Communications leadership to
identify and attempt to correct the reasons for the extended dispatch times shown in the
study year data. (Recommendation No. 43.)
■ The KFD should aggressively take whatever steps are necessary to significantly improve turnout
times for both fire and EMS incidents. This will serve to reduce and improve overall response
times to emergency incidents. (Recommendation No. 44.)
≈ ≈ ≈
Travel Time
Travel time is key to understanding how fire and EMS station location influences a community’s
aggregate response time performance. In fact, where these facilities are located is the single
most important factor in determining overall response times. Travel time can be mapped from
existing and proposed station locations. The location of responding units is one key factor in
response time; reducing response times, which is typically a key performance measure in
determining the efficiency of department operations, often depends on this factor. The goal of
placement of a single fire station or creating a network of responding fire stations in a single
community is to optimize coverage with short travel distances, when possible, while giving
special attention to natural and manmade barriers, and response routes that can create
163
response-time problems.95 This goal is generally budget-driven and based on demand intensity
of fire and EMS incidents, response times, and identified risks.
As already discussed, KFD normally responds from two stations.
NFPA and ISO have established different indices in determining fire station distribution. The ISO
Fire Suppression Rating Schedule, section 560, indicates that first-due engine companies should
serve areas that are within a 1.5-mile travel distance. The placement of fire stations that
achieves this type of separation creates service areas that are approximately 4.5 square miles in
size, depending on the road network and other geographical barriers (rivers, lakes, railroads,
limited access highways, etc.). NFPA references the placement of fire stations in an indirect way.
It recommends that fire stations be placed in a distribution that achieves the desired minimum
response times. NFPA Standard 1710, section 4.1.2.1(3) and (6), suggests an engine placement
that achieves a 240-second (four-minute) travel time for the first arriving unit. Using an empirical
model called the “piece-wise linear travel time function” the Rand Institute has estimated that
the average emergency response speed for fire apparatus is 35 mph. At this speed, the distance
a fire engine can travel in four minutes is approximately 1.97 miles.96 A polygon based on a 1.97-
mile travel distance results in a service area that, on average, is 7.3 square miles.97
It is important to note several aspects of the polygon models and the associated travel
distances and times. First, the model often assumes that resources are distributed equally
throughout the service area, which is generally not the case. In addition, the road network, and
geographical barriers such as a railroad or limited access highways, can impact the distance
units can cover over a given amount of time. That said, the formulas do provide a useful
reference when attempting to benchmark travel distances and response times.
This section expands on the travel times outlined above, depicting how travel times of 240, 360,
and 480 seconds look when mapped from the current fire station locations. Illustrating response
time is important when considering the location from which assets should be deployed. When
historical demand is coupled with risk analysis, a more informed decision can be made about
station numbers and locations.
As discussed above, travel time (aka: response time) is key to understanding how fire facility
location influences a community’s aggregate response time performance. NFPA sets
benchmark travel times for first arriving fire units as:98
■ ≤ 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company to a fire suppression incident 90 percent of
the time.
■ ≤ 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company with automated external defibrillator (AED)
or higher-level capability to an EMS incident.
The NFPA also benchmarks the travel time of the second arriving unit on a fire incident, and the
travel time to assemble the first alarm assignment of apparatus and staff on low/medium
hazards as:
95. NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency
Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Departments, 2010 Edition, 122.
96. University of Tennessee Municipal Technical Advisory Service, “Clinton Fire Location Station Study,”
Knoxville, TN, November 2012. p. 8.
97. Ibid., p. 9.
98. NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency
Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments.
164
■ ≤ 360 seconds for the second company 90 percent of the time.
■ ≤ 480 seconds to assemble the initial first alarm assignment on scene 90 percent of the time for
low/medium hazard.
FIGURE 4-15: Fire Service Response Time Algorithm – Response Time to On Scene
As we said, the location of responding units is one key factor in reducing response times and is a
key performance measure in determining the efficiency of department operations.
Likewise, current demand and potential for future demand for service is a consideration for the
siting of fire facilities. Demand is the number and types of calls for services provided by the entire
fire department. When demand is evaluated, it is important the number of incidents is not
confused with the number of unit responses. An emergency call may require the response of
more than one unit, but only one incident number is generated. This is a direct accelerator of
demand.
The following figures use GIS mapping to illustrate 240-second, 360-second, and 480-second
travel time bleeds, using the existing street network from the current KFD stations.
The GIS data for streets includes speed limits for each street segment and allows for “U-turns” for
dead-end streets and intersections, as well as other travel obstacles.
It is, however, important to note that while GIS-drawn, theoretical travel times do reflect
favorably on the adequacy of station facilities and their corresponding locations within the city
to support efficient fire and EMS response to the current built upon areas. Keep in mind, the
benefits of favorable travel time findings are only meaningfully realized when apparatus can be
predictably staffed for response and have aggressive turnout times.
It is important to understand that measuring and analyzing response times and response time
coverage are measurements of performance. Earlier when we discussed community risk, we
noted that the KFD, like most other fire departments in the nation, is an all-hazards response
agency. Linking response data to community risks lays the foundation for future fire department
planning in terms of fire station location, the need for additional fire stations, and staffing levels.
Managing fire department response capabilities to the identified community’s risk focuses on
three components which are:
■ Having a full understanding of the total risk in the community and how each impacts the fire
department in terms of resiliency, what the consequences are to the community and fire
165
department should a specific risk or combination of two or more occur, and preparing for and
understanding the probability that the risk may occur.
■ Linking risk to the deployment of resources to effectively manage every incident. This includes
assembling an Effective Response Force for the response risk in measurable times
benchmarked against NFPA standards, deploying the appropriate apparatus (engines,
ladders, heavy rescues, ambulances), and having a response force trained to combat a
specific risk.
■ Understanding that each element of response time plays a role in the management of
community risk. Low response times of the initial arriving engine and low time to assemble an
Effective Response Force on fire and other incidents are associated with positive outcomes.
The next table provides detail on the average and 90th percentile response times to calls that
occurred in different parts of the KFD’s response area. These can then be compared with the
GIS-generated response time bleeds for those areas.
TABLE 4-11: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by
Area
Area Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min.
Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
K61-SK 4Corner 3.7 1.6 7.9 13.1 14.0 2.5 13.2 26.3
KS61 Commercial 2.6 1.5 5.0 9.1 4.5 2.6 8.5 13.8
KS61 Residential 2.3 1.6 6.2 10.1 3.8 2.6 10.0 14.8
Station 61 Subtotal 2.4 1.6 5.7 9.7 4.0 2.6 9.4 14.4
KS62 Commercial 2.2 1.6 5.3 9.1 3.7 2.6 8.2 13.2
KS62 Residential 2.1 1.7 6.7 10.5 3.4 2.7 10.5 14.6
Station 62 Subtotal 2.2 1.6 6.1 9.9 3.4 2.7 9.8 14.0
Total 2.3 1.6 5.8 9.7 3.9 2.6 9.6 14.3
The following figure compares the projected 240-second response from the current KFD stations.
It also shows fire and EMS demand.
§ § §
166
FIGURE 4-16: Travel Time of 240 Seconds from KFD Stations
It can be seen in this figure that, at 240 seconds, the KFD stations can cover less than 50 percent
of city; however, the older, more densely populated sections are covered. As can be seen,
there are significant gaps in coverage in various areas of the city, particularly the west and south
sides. However, in some cases, those gaps also indicate a lack of accessible roads. Even with
those gaps, the city should have better compliance with the NFPA’s recommended response
time benchmarks than the data indicates. Conversely, an important takeaway from this figure is
the fact that the areas of the city that fall outside of the 240-second first unit response zone have
lower population density and relatively lower call volume when compared to other areas of the
city. As well, it is important to understand that although the city does not have 240-second
coverage to all of the fire management zones, the 240-second benchmark is at the 90th
percentile, not the 100th percentile. Actual travel times were discussed earlier in this section;
however, they do not meet compliance with the NFPA 1710 benchmark at the 90th percentile.
The next figure illustrates the 1.5-mile ISO-FSRS coverage circles for engine company response
throughout the city. Coverage is similar.
167
FIGURE 4-17: ISO-FSRS 1.5-Mile Response Circles for Engine Companies
The next figure looks at the 360-second response bleeds, which in the NFPA 1710 standard is the
time benchmark for the second due engine to arrive on the scene in less than or equal to 360
seconds 90 percent of the time. This standard links to the two-in/two-out OSHA and NFPA 1500
standards (which were discussed earlier), as well as the initial critical tasking and the early
assembling of the Effective Response Force for the incident.
This figure tells us that much of the city is covered by KFD fire stations. However, there are still
areas in the far southern sections of the city that are not covered even at 360 seconds. The
areas that are outside of the 360-second travel time have no call volume and probably few, if
any, reachable streets.
168
FIGURE 4-18: Travel Time of 360 Seconds from KFD Stations
The next figure looks at the 480-second response bleeds, which in the NFPA 1710 standard is the
time benchmark for the assembling of the initial first alarm assignment on scene in 480 seconds
or less, 90 percent of the time for low/medium hazards. This standard links to the incident critical
tasking and the assembling of the Effective Response Force for the incident.
This figure tells us that the fire management zone (City of Kalispell) is mostly covered with the
existing fire stations. However, the city’s heavy reliance on automatic/mutual aid for all reported
structure fires will impact the arrival time of the entire first alarm assignment. The mutual aid
response time map is also provided for comparison. This shows that most of the mutual aid can
get into at least sections of Kalispell with 480 seconds travel time. However, with unknown
turnout times for non-staffed stations and depending upon where in the city the incident is, will
make it very difficult for Kalispell to meet this benchmark. However, this is not unusual in small
island cities that are surrounded by volunteer or on-call fire departments.
169
FIGURE 4-19: Travel Time of 480 Seconds from KFD and Mutual Aid Stations
One final note here, the ISO Fire Suppression Rating Schedule also indicates that first-due ladder
companies should serve areas that are within a 2.5-mile travel distance. The placement of fire
stations that achieves this type of separation creates service areas that are approximately 6.25
square miles in size, depending on the road network and other geographical barriers. The next
figure illustrates a circle designating a 2.5-mile travel circle around Fire Station 2, from which the
city’s only ladder is deployed. It should be noted that the downtown area is outside of the
acceptable ISO travel distance, which results in points deduction in the department’s ISO rating.
§ § §
170
FIGURE 4-20: ISO-FSRS 2.5-Mile Response Circle for Ladder Company at Station 2
§ § §
171
KFD EMS SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL
Emergency medical service (EMS) operations are an important component of the
comprehensive emergency services delivery system in any community. Together with the
delivery of police and fire services, it forms the backbone of the community’s overall public
safety net. As will be noted in several sections of this report, the KFD, like many, if not most, fire
departments respond to significantly more emergency medical incidents and low acuity
incidents than actual fires or other types of emergency incidents.
The EMS component of the emergency services delivery system is more heavily regulated than
the fire side. In addition to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1710,
Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations,
and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments (2020 Edition), NFPA 450
Guidelines for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Systems, (2009 edition), provides a
template for local stakeholders to evaluate an EMS system and to make improvements based
on that evaluation. The Commission on Accreditation of Ambulance Services (CAAS)99 also
promulgates standards that are applicable to their accreditation process for ambulance
services. In addition, the State of Montana Department of Health and Human Services EMS and
Trauma Systems Section100 regulates EMS agencies; certain federal Medicare regulations are
also applicable.
As a percentage of overall incidents responded to by the emergency agencies in most
communities, it could be argued that EMS incidents constitute the greatest number of “true”
emergencies, where intervention by trained personnel does truly make a difference, sometimes
literally between life and death.
Heart attack and stroke victims require rapid intervention, care, and transport to a medical
facility. The longer the time duration without care, the less likely the patient is to fully recover.
Numerous studies have shown that irreversible brain damage can occur if the brain is deprived
of oxygen for more than four minutes. In addition, the potential for successful resuscitation during
cardiac arrest decreases exponentially with each passing minute that cardiopulmonary
resuscitation (CPR), or cardiac defibrillation, is delayed (see next figure).
§ § §
99. The Commission on Accreditation of Ambulance Services (CAAS) is an independent commission that
has established a comprehensive series of standards for the ambulance service industry.
100. https://dphhs.mt.gov/publichealth/EMSTS/ems/servicelicensing
172
FIGURE 4-21: Cardiac Arrest Survival Timeline
The figure illustrates that the potential for successful resuscitation during cardiac arrest decreases
exponentially, by 7 percent to 10 percent, with each passing minute that cardio-pulmonary
resuscitation (CPR) or cardiac defibrillation and advanced life support intervention is delayed.
The figure also illustrates that few attempts at resuscitation after 10 minutes are successful.
Emergency medical services (EMS) for the City of Kalispell are provided at the advanced life
support (ALS)/paramedic level by the KFD. Advanced life support or ALS-level care refers to
prehospital interventions that can be brought into the field by paramedics. Typically, this service
level includes the ability to bring much of the emergency room capability to the patient.
Paramedics can administer intravenous fluids, manage a patient’s airway, provide drug therapy,
utilize the full capabilities of a 12-lead cardiac monitor, and provide a vital communication link
to the medical control physician who can provide specific medical direction based on the
situation.
Of the KFD’s current sworn personnel, 24 (70.6 percent) possess paramedic certification, with the
remainder possessing advanced EMT certification. Current department policy is that every fire
unit in the department is staffed at all times with a minimum of one paramedic, meaning that
currently there are always at least two on duty. All KFD fire suppression units (engine and the
ladder when it is in service) are also equipped with ALS capabilities that allow them to provide
critical lifesaving interventions, when necessary, while awaiting the arrival of an ambulance
transport unit. The department maintains three fully equipped ALS-capable ambulances.
Depending upon the department’s staffing level each day, there is often not a crew that is
dedicated strictly to the ambulance. When staffing levels are at either five, six, or seven
personnel, the ambulance is staffed from Station 62; however, except when staffing is at five
personnel, the personnel are cross staffing the ambulance along with the ladder truck. In the
period from January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2022, the department operated at these
staffing levels 302 days (82.7 percent of the time). It is not until the on-duty staffing is eight or
more that a two-person crew is dedicated to staffing the primary ambulance. The practical
implication of this is that when staffing is at six or seven, and there is a fire call in progress, there
may be no ambulance staffed for immediate response. In this case, a fire suppression unit may
respond to provide initial care while a mutual aid ambulance responds for transport.
173
Even when staffing levels are sufficient to assign a crew that is dedicated to the ambulance,
when a significant structure fire occurs, it is likely these personnel will still be unavailable for
immediate response due to the department’s limited overall staffing. However, this situation
occurs infrequently in Kalispell and is not uncommon in similar sized communities.
As was previously discussed, Kalispell utilizes a priority dispatch system to classify emergency
medical calls as to their severity.
Medical direction for the KFD’s EMS program is coordinated countywide through the Flathead
County Office of Emergency Services. There is a memorandum of understanding and a county
assessment of 2 mils that funds provision of EMS services throughout the county. The medical
director also controls the issuance of EMS provider licenses.
CPSM was informed by the medical director that the influx of new residents following the COVID-
19 pandemic has shocked the EMS system throughout the county, but particularly in Kalispell. In
addition, the normal tourist influx during the summer months strains many county services. It is his
opinion that the system, as currently structured, cannot sustain services given the current growth
rate.
A KFD Captain serves as the department’s part-time EMS coordinator. As such, he is still assigned
to work as an officer on a shift. He handles his EMS coordinator responsibilities as an ancillary
duty. He is authorized overtime, when necessary, to complete these duties. As was previously
discussed in Section 2, as the city and department grow, and the number of EMS calls continue
to increase, the time is drawing near when this position should be a full-time staff position.
To cope with the increasing call volume and shortage of EMS personnel, recent protocol
changes allow lower acuity (less serious) EMS calls to be “stacked.” In other words, minor EMS
calls may not generate an immediate response by an ambulance or other emergency
responder. If a call is coded BLS Yellow and the KFD is out of resources but will be able to
respond within 10 minutes, then no mutual aid is activated and the response is delayed until a
KFD ambulance is available, The call is placed into a queue to be handled when there is a unit
available. This is a concept that is growing in acceptance as EMS systems try to cope with a
crushing workload.
The next table and figure show the EMS call totals for the 12-month period evaluated for this
study, including number of calls by type, average calls per day, and the percentage of calls
that fall into each call type category.
§ § §
174
TABLE 4-12: EMS Calls by Type and Number, and Percent of All Calls
Call Type Total Calls Calls per
Day
Call
Percentage
Breathing difficulty 244 0.7 5.7
Cardiac and stroke 304 0.8 7.1
Fall and injury 502 1.4 11.7
Illness and other 1,276 3.5 29.7
MVA 164 0.4 3.8
Overdose and psychiatric 121 0.3 2.8
Seizure and unconsciousness 456 1.2 10.6
EMS Subtotal 3,067 8.4 71.4
False alarm 217 0.6 5.1
Good intent 44 0.1 1.0
Hazard 95 0.3 2.2
Outside fire 25 0.1 0.6
Public service 263 0.7 6.1
Structure fire 26 0.1 0.6
Fire Subtotal 670 1.8 15.6
Canceled 319 0.9 7.4
Mutual aid* 237 0.6 5.5
Total 4,293 11.8 100.0
FIGURE 4-22: EMS Calls by Type
The EMS call data tells us:
■ EMS calls for the year totaled 3,067 (71.4 percent of all calls), an average of 8.4 per day.
■ Illness and other calls were the largest category of EMS calls at 41.6 percent of EMS calls, an
average of 3.5 calls per day.
175
■ Cardiac and stroke calls made up 9.9 percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.8 calls per day.
■ Motor vehicle accidents made up 5.3 percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.4 calls per day.
The following figure shows the workload of EMS responses by number of units arriving at these
incident types during the year studied. This figure only includes calls where a unit from the KFD
arrived.
FIGURE 4-23: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – EMS
The information in this figure tells us that:
■ On average, 1.4 units arrived per EMS call.
■ For EMS calls, one unit arrived 63.9 percent of the time, two units arrived 36.0 percent of the
time, and three units arrived 0.2 percent of the time.
One of the main factors to consider when analyzing EMS service operations is the transport
component of that service. Factors such as the percentage of incidents that result in either a
transport or a refusal, travel time to the nearest medical facility or facilities, and turnaround time
(the time from when the ambulance arrives at the hospital until they transfer care to hospital
staff and can be available for another emergency) at the medical facility all play roles in the
number of resources that are needed, and how well they can meet established benchmarks.
The latter factor (turnaround time) is a growing problem in many areas of the country with
overused and understaffed emergency departments.
The data in the next table shows the number of calls by call type broken out by transport and
non-transport calls. Transport calls were identified by requiring that at least one responding
medical unit had recorded both a “beginning to transport” time and an “arriving at the
hospital” time.
176
TABLE 4-13: Transport Calls by Call Type
Call Type Number of Calls Conversion
Rate Non-transport Transport Total
Breathing difficulty 63 181 244 74.2
Cardiac and stroke 88 216 304 71.1
Fall and injury 178 324 502 64.5
Illness and other 455 821 1,276 64.3
MVA 134 30 164 18.3
Overdose and psychiatric 35 86 121 71.1
Seizure and unconsciousness 178 278 456 61.0
EMS Subtotal 1,131 1,936 3,067 63.1
Fire & Other 1,120 106 1,226 8.6
Total 2,251 2,042 4,293 47.6
The information in this table tells us that:
■ Overall, 63.1 percent of EMS calls in Kalispell involved transporting one or more patients.
■ On average, there were 8.4 EMS calls per day, and 5.3 involved transporting one or more
patients.
■ Breathing difficulty calls had the highest transport rate, averaging 74.2 percent.
■ Motor vehicle accidents had the lowest transport rate, averaging 18.3 percent.
The next table shows the average duration of transport and non-transport EMS calls by call type.
TABLE 4-14: Time Component Analysis for Ambulance Transport Runs by Call
Type
Call Type
Average Time Spent per Run, Minutes Number
of Runs On
Scene
Traveling to
Hospital
At
Hospital Deployed
Breathing difficulty 14.1 7.0 19.0 48.4 181
Cardiac and stroke 14.5 6.8 19.4 48.2 216
Fall and injury 15.7 6.1 17.8 47.7 324
Illness and other 13.6 6.7 19.1 47.5 821
MVA 15.5 8.0 21.1 51.1 32
Overdose and psychiatric 14.2 6.5 16.6 45.7 86
Seizure and unconsciousness 16.3 6.7 18.5 49.6 278
EMS Total 14.6 6.7 18.7 48.0 1,938
Fire & Other Total 16.4 11.3 20.7 59.5 106
Total 14.7 6.9 18.8 48.6 2,044
Note: Average unit deployed time per run is lower than the average call duration for some call types because call
duration is based on the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call, which may include an engine or ladder. Total deployed time is greater than the combination of on-scene, transport, and hospital wait times as
it includes turnout, initial travel, and hospital return times.
177
The information in this table tells us that:
■ The average time spent on-scene for a transport EMS call was 14.6 minutes.
■ The average travel time from the scene of the EMS call to the hospital was 6.7 minutes.
■ The average deployed time spent on transport EMS calls was 48.0 minutes.
■ The average deployed time at the hospital was 18.7 minutes, which accounts for
approximately 39 percent of the average total deployed time for a transport EMS call.
One thing the KFD will need to monitor very closely moving forward is any impact the ongoing
debates over funding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) may have on its billing and revenues. Over
the past several years with the changes in insurance reimbursements brought about by the ACA,
a growing number of EMS providers are looking to get out of the ALS business. Increasingly,
private insurance companies and the government have reduced (or are considering reductions
in) reimbursement rates, and are becoming more reluctant, in general, to compensate
departments for the full cost of emergency room transportation fees, especially for non-
emergency treatment. Communities that provide EMS transport services are therefore facing
pressure on their transport revenues.
One of the fastest growing value-added service enhancements in EMS is the development of
Mobile Integrated Healthcare/Community Paramedicine (MIH/CP) programs. Mobile Integrated
Healthcare is defined by the National Association of EMTs (NAEMT) as “the provision of
healthcare using patient-centered, mobile resources in the out-of-hospital environment.”
MIH/CP is comprised of a suite of potential services that EMS could provide to fill gaps in the
local healthcare delivery system. In essence, MIH/CP is intended to better manage the
increasing EMS call volume and better align the types of care being provided with the needs of
the patient. To be effective, MIH/CP is commonly accomplished through a collaborative
approach with healthcare and social service agencies within the community.
MIP/CP can be provided through community paramedicine programs, which are programs that
use EMTs and paramedics to provide this out-of-hospital health care. MIH/CP programs help
facilitate more appropriate uses of emergency care resources and enhance access to primary
care, particularly for underserved populations, by focusing on chronic disease management,
post-discharge follow-up, and transport to non-emergency care settings.
FIGURE 4-24: MIH/CP Umbrella
178
The benefits of MIH/CP are therefore two-fold. These programs potentially help provide more
appropriate health care to community residents, and if reimbursement arrangements can be
agreed upon, also offer a substitute funding stream, separate from emergency transport, for
community-based EMS transport programs.
In 2009, there were four programs like this in the country, but a recent survey by the National
Association of EMTs identified more than 250 active MIH/CP programs now operating across the
U.S.101 Although it was reported to CPSM that this concept has been slow to gain traction in
Montana, the KFD should investigate options to operationalize an MIH/CP program for Kalispell.
A consideration for a potential role for an MIH/CP program in Kalispell could be integrated with
the CR 1 program for mental health emergencies that operates with the KPD, which could be a
specialized response unit for behavioral health emergencies. Sometimes referred to as a Crisis
Intervention Team (CIT), specialized units such as these have been effective in other
communities across the country to reduce the risks associated with behavioral health-related
responses.102
There may be government funds available for implementation of these types of programs, and
some recent changes to the Medicare regulations indicate a possibly favorable view on billing
for these services. Several fire departments have obtained grants to implement this type of
program. A program of this type in Kalispell—particularly with its high percentage of residents
over the age of 65—could improve both levels of service offered to the community and EMS
revenues generated. This could be another potential duty for the EMS coordinator to undertake.
EMS Service Delivery Recommendation:
■ The KFD should work with its medical director and other community stakeholders to determine
the role that an MIH/CP program could play in working with high utilizers and other patients
within Kalispell who would benefit from this type of service model. (Recommendation No. 45.)
≈ ≈ ≈
LOGAN HEALTH EMS RESPONSE ZONE
Logan Health Regional Medical Center is a 622-bed medical facility located at 330 Conway
Drive (Emergency Department entrance). The hospital is the region’s only university-level
academic research and medical center. The medical center is the anchor of a large and
growing comprehensive healthcare complex known locally as “Pill Hill.” It is located off
Sunnyview Lane (U.S. Route 93) and includes numerous doctors’ offices, and other medical
diagnostic, treatment, and support facilities. The following figure shows the location of the Logan
health complex in Kalispell.
101. http://www.naemt.org/docs/default-source/2017-publication-docs/mih-cp-survey-2018-04-12-2018-
web-links-1.pdf?Status=Temp&sfvrsn=a741cb92_2
102. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cahoots-model-prehospital-mental-health-crisis-intervention
179
FIGURE 4-25: Logan Health Complex Location
As complexes like this often do, the Logan health complex and its surrounding areas generate a
significant number of calls for the KFD. This included numerous EMS calls at doctors’ offices and
other facilities within the complex. Most of these facilities already have trained and/or skilled
medical personnel on site. In addition, most of these calls result in transport, that is, at most, a
few blocks to the hospital ED.
Logan Health has its own in-house ALS-transport capable ambulances that were primarily used
for interhospital or facility transports. These personnel are deployed from a location adjacent to
the ED. Working collaboratively, KFD and Logan Health implemented a pilot program by which
the Logan ambulances handle calls within the health complex. This area was later expanded to
include several primarily residential areas adjacent to the Logan Health complex. The following
figures show the boundaries of the current Logan Health EMS response zone.
§ § §
180
FIGURE 4-26: Logan Health EMS Response Zone
Between June 2, 2022, and December 31, 2022, Logan Health ambulances 2821 and 2822
responded to or arrived at 490 calls, of which 291 were 9-1-1 emergency incidents. The
remaining 199 were interfacility transfer calls. Out of the 291 9-1-1 emergency calls, Logan Health
ambulances arrived at 283 calls (97 percent) and transported one or more patients in 231 calls
(82 percent).
The next table shows the number of calls by call type and the percentage of calls that fall into
each call type category for the six months studied.
TABLE 4-15: Calls Responded to by Logan Health, by Type
Call Type Total
Calls
Call
Percentage
Assist agency 4 0.8
Breathing difficulty 24 4.9
Cardiac and stroke 25 5.1
Fall and injury 43 8.8
Illness and other 147 30.0
Interfacility transfer 199 40.6
MVA 7 1.4
Overdose and psychiatric 7 1.4
Seizure and unconsciousness 34 6.9
Total 490 100.0
Analysis of this data indicates that:
■ Logan Health ambulances responded to 490 calls, including four agency assist calls.
181
■ 9-1-1 emergency calls totaled 291 (59.4 percent of EMS calls).
■ Interfacility transfer calls totaled 199 (40.6 percent of EMS calls).
The next table breaks down the workload of Logan Health by the fire district or first due station
where the calls occurred. Of particular note here is the number of calls that occurred in Kalispell.
Logan Health does respond both in Kalispell and to surrounding communities for mutual aid
when needed.
TABLE 4-16: Annual Workload of Logan Health by District
District / Station Area Calls Percent
Calls Runs Minutes
Per Run
Work
Hours
Percent
Work
KFD Station 61 2 0.4 2 42.9 1.4 0.2
KFD Station 62 394 80.4 401 87.8 587.0 76.0
Glacier Park Intl. Airport 9 1.8 9 119.9 18.0 2.3
Evergreen FD (MID) 5 1.0 5 236.1 19.7 2.5
Marion FD (West) 3 0.6 3 219.8 11.0 1.4
Olney FD 1 0.2 1 1.6 0.0 0.0
Whitefish FD 76 15.5 76 106.6 135.0 17.5
Total 490 100.0 497 93.2 772.1 100.0
The following figure plots the locations of the EMS calls that occurred in the designated Logan
Health EMS response zone.
FIGURE 4-27: Logan Health EMS Calls in Designated Response Zone
182
One of the issues that was identified to CPSM by the members of the KFD was that Logan EMS
has long response times, especially when they are already posted in the complex. While the
data analysis did not break this down, it was reported that there have been multiple occasions
where a KFD engine has arrived on the scene before the Logan ambulance.
In this analysis, 199 interfacility transfer calls, four agency assist calls, eight calls where no units
recorded a valid on-scene time, six calls with a total response time exceeding 30 minutes, and
40 calls where one or more segments of the first arriving unit’s response time could not be
calculated due to missing or faulty data were all excluded. As a result, a total of 233 calls are
included in the analysis.
The following table breaks down the average and 90th percentile dispatch, turnout, travel, and
total response times by call type.
TABLE 4-17: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Logan
Health Ambulance, by Call Type
Call Type Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min. Call
Count Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
Breathing difficulty 2.1 3.2 3.4 8.7 3.3 5.6 5.2 11.2 19
Cardiac and stroke 2.0 3.0 4.1 9.1 4.6 5.2 8.9 16.7 19
Fall and injury 2.6 3.2 3.6 9.4 5.9 5.4 5.2 13.8 36
Illness and other 2.4 3.4 3.1 8.9 3.8 5.5 5.1 11.2 120
MVA 2.1 2.8 3.8 8.8 5.4 4.9 5.1 11.3 5
OD* 3.0 2.5 3.1 8.6 5.5 6.0 4.2 11.2 6
Seizure and UNC** 2.0 2.9 3.4 8.3 3.4 6.3 5.5 10.4 28
Total 2.3 3.2 3.3 8.9 3.9 5.4 5.2 11.4 233
Note: *OD= Overdose and psychiatric; **UNC=Unconsciousness.
The data from this tables informs us that:
■ The average dispatch time was 2.3 minutes.
■ The average turnout time was 3.2 minutes.
■ The average travel time was 3.3 minutes.
■ The average total response time was 8.9 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile dispatch time was 3.9 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile turnout time was 5.4 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile travel time was 5.2 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile total response time was 11.4 minutes.
It is difficult to totally quantify these response times, particularly travel time, when Logan’s
responses range from short responses within the complex to as far away as Glacier International
Airport and Whitefish. On the surface, however, they are well above the recommended EMS
benchmarks, although these include dispatch and turnout times, which would not be impacted
by the ultimate location of the call. While extended response times may be marginally
acceptable in instances where the call is at a doctors’ office or medical facility where there is
trained staff, it is not acceptable for EMS calls outside of the Logan Health complex where
183
Logan ambulances are considered to be the “first due” ambulance. If a KFD engine is arriving
first to these incidents, that also is not acceptable. The next figure shows the 240-second first due
response bleed from the Logan Health ED.
FIGURE 4-28: Logan Health Station 240-Second Response Bleed
The following table shows the number of 9-1-1 calls by call type broken out by transport and
non-transport calls.
§ § §
184
TABLE 4-18: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Call Type
Call Type Number of Calls Conversion
Rate Non-transport Transport Total
Agency assist 1 3 4 75.0
Breathing difficulty 7 17 24 70.8
Cardiac and stroke 4 21 25 84.0
Fall and injury 10 33 43 76.7
Illness and other 27 120 147 81.6
MVA 5 2 7 28.6
Overdose and psychiatric 1 6 7 85.7
Seizure and unconsciousness 5 29 34 85.3
Total 60 231 291 79.4
The next table shows the average duration of transport and non-transport EMS calls by call type.
The following table gives the average deployed time for an ambulance on a transport call,
along with three major components of the deployed time: on-scene time, travel to hospital time,
and at-hospital time. Normally, the number of runs (234) exceeds the number of calls (231) as a
call may have multiple runs. In addition, average times may differ slightly from similar averages
measured per call.
TABLE 4-19: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Call Duration by Call Type
Call Type
Non-transport Transport
Average
Duration, Min.
Number of
Calls
Average
Duration, Min.
Number of
Calls
Agency assist 1.6 1 24.1 3
Breathing difficulty 54.9 7 55.5 17
Cardiac and stroke 50.8 4 47.3 21
Fall and injury 42.7 10 57.9 33
Illness and other 39.5 27 53.3 120
MVA 14.6 5 40.6 2
Overdose and psychiatric 33.1 1 34.2 6
Seizure and unconsciousness 39.0 5 56.5 29
Total 39.7 60 53.0 231
Note: The duration of a call is defined as the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call.
§ § §
185
TABLE 4-20: Time Components for Logan Health Ambulance Transport Runs by
Type
Call Type
Average Time Spent per Run, Min. Number
of Runs On
Scene
Traveling to
Hospital
At
Hospital Deployed
Agency assist 2.7 0.1 8.0 13.7 5
Breathing difficulty 23.5 2.8 22.8 55.5 17
Cardiac and stroke 21.9 5.6 13.3 47.3 21
Fall and injury 23.7 3.0 23.4 57.9 33
Illness and other 20.9 3.6 21.6 53.0 121
MVA 26.0 2.0 10.2 40.6 2
Overdose and psychiatric 18.2 1.1 9.7 34.2 6
Seizure and unconsciousness 23.8 3.3 22.6 56.5 29
Total 21.5 3.5 20.6 52.4 234
Note: Average unit deployed time per run is lower than the average call duration for some call types because call
duration is based on the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call.
As can be seen from the data in the above table, for most of Logan’s transport calls to the
hospital, the average travel time is short, which suggests that these transports originate in close
proximity to the hospital.
Logan Health EMS Response Zone Recommendations:
■ The KFD should work with Logan Health to identify the reasons for the elongated dispatch,
turnout, and travel times for the Logan Health EMS response zone. Once deficiencies have
been identified, appropriate actions should be taken to mitigate these issues.
(Recommendation No. 46.)
■ Logan Health EMS should only be dispatched alone and/or as the first due ambulance to
medical calls that originate from within the Logan Health medical complex such as doctors’
offices, diagnostic facilities, etc. EMS calls that occur in the neighborhoods adjacent to the
Logan Health complex should be handled by the KFD utilizing normal response protocol.
(Recommendation No. 47.)
≈ ≈ ≈
AUTOMATIC/MUTUAL AID
Mutual aid (MA) is an essential component of almost every fire department’s operation. Except
for the largest cities, no municipal fire department can, or should, be expected to have
adequate resources to respond to and safely, effectively, and efficiently mitigate large-scale
and complex incidents. Mutual aid is shared between communities when their day-to-day
operational fire, rescue, and EMS capabilities have been exceeded, and this ensures that the
citizens of the communities are protected even when local resources are overwhelmed.
Automatic aid (AA) is an extension of mutual aid, where the resources from adjacent
communities are dispatched to respond at the same time as the units from the jurisdiction in
which the incident is occurring. There are two basic principles for automatic aid, the first being
that all jurisdictional boundaries are essentially erased, which allows for the closest, most-
appropriate unit to respond to an incident, regardless of which jurisdiction it belongs to. The
186
second is to provide, immediately and at the time of initial dispatch, additional personnel or
resources that may be needed to mitigate the reported incident.
Automatic and mutual aid are generally provided without charge among the participants. Over
the years, automatic and mutual aid programs have been developed and refined and are now
widely used in the U.S. fire service to augment services and reduce response times.
For AA and MA to be successful, participating agencies must train frequently together and at
times, help each other with training shortfalls, specialized or specific training specific to the
community. Likewise, successful MA and AA programs are recognized by the ISO in terms of
weight of response (staffing and equipment) and water supplies (fire flow).
The KFD participates in what were once robust automatic/mutual aid systems throughout
Flathead County. However, as the number of volunteer firefighters has declined nationally, these
systems are likewise struggling which has significantly increased the challenges related to their
reliability. The city has loose (verbal) mutual aid agreements with all its surrounding fire
department neighbors. The following are the departments that provide mutual aid in Kalispell for
major incidents. The equipment they provide was previously described in the section on fire
operations.
■ Evergreen FD (EFD): Combination department with several ALS ambulances, an engine, and a
ladder.
■ Smith Valley FD (SVFD): Volunteer department with a career ALS ambulance or cross-staffed
two-person engine.
■ West Valley FD (WVFD): Volunteer department with an engine.
■ Somers/Lakeside FD (SFD): Volunteer department with an ALS ambulance and an engine.
■ Whitefish FD (WFD): Career department, with a few volunteers, with an ALS ambulance,
engine, and ladder.
■ South Kalispell FD (SKFD): Volunteer department with an engine.
■ Creston FD (CFD): Volunteer department with an engine.
■ Bigfork FD (BFFD): Combination department with an engine.
■ Bad Rock FD (BRFD): Volunteer department with an engine.
■ Columbia Falls FD (CFFD): Combination department. Primarily volunteer with career day shift,
M-F.
■ Marion FD (MFD): Volunteer with paid ALS ambulance.
The following figure shows the locations of these stations.
187
FIGURE 4-29: KFD and Automatic/Mutual Aid Partner Station Locations
The next table breaks down the workload of KFD by external fire district where the calls
occurred. The following provides further detail on the workload associated with structure and
outside fire calls, also broken down by fire district. This table includes structure fires in Kalispell as
well that would have generated an automatic aid response.
TABLE 4-21: Annual Workload by District
District / Station
Area Calls Percent
Calls Runs Runs Per
Day
Minutes
Per Run
Work
Hours
Percent
Work
Minutes
Per Day
KFD Station 61 2,644 61.6 3,880 10.6 29.9 1,936.3 63.8 318.3
KFD Station 62 1,412 32.9 1,764 4.8 30.9 908.3 29.9 149.3
Evergreen FD 65 1.5 68 0.2 49.5 56.1 1.8 9.2
Smith Valley FD 17 0.4 18 0.0 41.9 12.6 0.4 2.1
South Kalispell FD 58 1.4 67 0.2 33.0 36.8 1.2 6.1
West Valley FD 83 1.9 97 0.3 48.2 77.9 2.6 12.8
Other* 14 0.3 14 0.0 27.1 6.3 0.2 1.0
Total 4,293 100.0 5,908 16.2 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8
Note: *The 14 calls that occurred in “Other” districts include five calls in Whitefish, two calls in Creston, and one call each in Bad Rock North, Bigfork, Columbia Falls, Glacier Airport, Hungry Horse, the South Kalispell / Kalispell corner quadrant,
and Somers fire districts, respectively.
188
TABLE 4-22: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District
District / Station
Area
Structure Fires Outside Fires Combined
Runs Minutes
per Run Runs Minutes
per Run
Annual
Hours
Percent
Work
KFD Station 61 36 76.7 28 36.3 63.0 62.9
KFD Station 62 10 29.4 4 23.2 6.5 6.5
Evergreen FD 12 108.0 0 NA 21.6 21.6
Smith Valley FD 4 64.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
South Kalispell FD 0 NA 1 26.4 0.4 0.4
West Valley FD 2 130.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
Total 64 76.1 33 34.4 100.1 100.0
The data in these tables indicates:
■ There were 237 mutual aid calls or six percent of the total calls.
■ There were 264 runs, including 57 runs dispatched for canceled calls. The daily average was
0.7 runs.
■ The total deployed time for the year was 189.7 hours or 6.2 percent of the total annual
workload. The daily average was 31.7 minutes for all units combined.
The KFD receives ambulance mutual aid when KFD is out of resources to respond to an EMS call
that is coded BLS red or ALS. EMS mutual aid is received from Evergreen Fire, Smith Valley Fire,
and Somers/Lakeside QRU, Whitefish Fire, Bigfork Fire, and Three Rivers EMS.
Mass casualty Incidents: Five (5) Ambulances dispatched starting with KFD ambulances that are
available, the rest are dispatched from aid partners; KFD engine; and both the Chief and
Assistant Chief.
Since the KFD relies on automatic/mutual aid for all structure fire responses, and in order to
attempt to meet NFPA 1710 travel time benchmarks for the entire first alarm assignment to arrive
on location (480 second travel time), the following map illustrates that travel time from the
nearest aid stations.
§ § §
189
FIGURE 4-30: 480 Second Response Bleeds – Mutual Aid Stations
The issue of which companies should respond to certain areas on mutual or automatic aid is
often the subject of debate within the emergency services field. While the simple answer is to
say the closest should always be called, the reality is not that clear-cut. A significant issue that is
closely related to automatic and mutual aid is the training of departments and personnel who
are participating. In large part due to the lack of mandatory firefighter training requirements (in
many cases even basic Firefighter I training is not mandatory), the training of personnel from fire
company to fire company can vary widely. This is particularly true in the volunteer fire service. It
also creates a major dilemma for fire chiefs of well-trained organizations and can create serious
operational and safety issues on the emergency scene. In short, personnel who are not
adequately trained can be a serious detriment on the emergency scene and present liabilities
to the municipality in which the incident is taking place. Ultimately, the incident commander is
responsible for the safety and conduct of everyone on the scene regardless of their
organizational affiliation.
It is certainly reasonable for the KFD, and in a larger context the city as a whole, to expect that
companies coming into the city on automatic and/or mutual aid be required to meet certain
minimum training requirements as long as they are valid and reasonable. These minimum
training requirements should be spelled out in the formal, signed automatic/mutual aid
190
agreements that should exist between various communities and/or fire departments. A provision
in those agreements could stipulate that the fire chief or other designated individual must certify
in writing annually that all his personnel (at least those who are supposed to be interior structural-
certified and who might respond on mutual aid) continue to meet the requisite training
standards. For example, several fire chiefs in southern New Jersey have informed surrounding
mutual aid departments that personnel with beards103 are not permitted to respond into their
communities on mutual aid.
Mutual/Automatic Aid Recommendations:
■ The KFD should formalize, in writing, its automatic and mutual aid agreements with all its
neighboring departments. Written agreements codify an understanding between two or more
entities to provide support in a given context. The primary purpose is to support each other’s
response efforts in an emergency. (Recommendation No. 48.)
□ An alternative way to formalize the mutual aid agreements for both fire and EMS is to
develop one agreement for the entire county with each emergency services organization
signing on as a participant.
■ The City of Kalispell and KFD should require that personnel who staff fire and rescue
organizations that respond into the city on mutual aid possess the same minimum levels of
training (Firefighter I and II) that Kalispell personnel are required to maintain.
(Recommendation No. 49.)
■ The City of Kalispell and KFD mutual aid agreements with surrounding fire departments should
stipulate the minimum required training standards for personnel who may respond into the city
to assist. The agreements should also stipulate that the ranking officer of each entity must
certify in writing on an annual basis that his/her personnel comply with the standards.
(Recommendation No. 50.)
≈ ≈ ≈
SPECIALIZED FIRE-TECHNICAL RESPONSE CAPABILITIES
Specialized response capabilities include hazardous materials (hazmat), high-angle rope rescue,
trench collapse, building collapse, complicated heavy auto extrication, elevated rescue with an
aerial platform, and confined space rescue. There are no requirements in NFPA 1710, ISO-FSRS,
or other national benchmarks that mandate a fire department deliver all these services. What is
required in the NFPA standard is an organizational statement that sets forth the criteria for the
various types of special operations response and mitigation activities to which the fire
department is required to respond.
Large municipal fire departments often build these assets into their day-to-day staffing and
deployable resources. In some cases, separate companies are created and staffed to manage
the hazmat and technical rescue service deliverables. Some cities assign these functions to
ladder and/or rescue companies to include auto-extrication. And in some communities, such as
Kalispell, engine companies carry auto extrication equipment for light- to medium-extrication
103. The OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard CFR 1910-134 requires all personnel who may need to wear
self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) to be fit tested on an annual basis with SCBA masks to ensure
proper fit. It is generally accepted industry practice that personnel with beards cannot pass a fit test or are
not in compliance if their beard was grown after the test.
191
incidents and are trained in certain aspects of hazmat and technical rescue incidents, more as
supportive assets in large-scale incidents.
By virtue of its position as the largest fire department in the area, along with the wide range of
specialized and potentially complex incidents it may experience that would require much more
specific training, skills, and capabilities, the KFD has multifaceted specialized technical incident
operational capabilities. The special operations teams represent a group of firefighter personnel
that in addition to their firefighting duties and training have elected to diversify and train to meet
the challenges and dangers of specific rescue environments. The following are the various
specialty/technician certifications that KFD personnel have achieved:
■ Technical Rescue – Technician-level including confined space, trench, rope, high/low angle,
and structural collapse.
■ Hazmat Response – Technician Level; response, rescue, detection, mitigation.
■ Swift Water Rescue.
The department’s special operations certified personnel are assigned to both stations, although
most of their equipment is stored at Station 1. These capabilities include high angle, rope,
confined space, and trench collapse technical rescue capabilities, in addition to normal vehicle
extrication. The department also has a certified level A hazardous materials response team. It is
the host for the Northwest Montana Regional Hazardous Material Team. All these special
operations capabilities are available for response to assist on incidents throughout northwestern
Montana.
As an example of a recent technical rescue incident handled by the KFD, on May 2, 2023, at
approx. 11:45 a.m., there was a 911 call for a subject who fell into a hole reported “as 30 feet
deep.” This was at a construction site, with work taking place on a new concrete vault that was
approx. 20 to 25 feet in depth. An employee had fallen from the top to the bottom of the vault.
Using high-angle rope rescue skills, Kalispell firefighters with the assistance of Whitefish Fire, were
able to remove the patient safely in a short amount of time, then stabilize and transport the
patient to the hospital for evaluation and further treatment.
FIGURE 4-31: Kalispell and Whitefish Firefighters Work on a Technical Rescue
Incident
192
Because of the specialized, often complex, and dangerous, nature of special operations, it is
imperative that the personnel who engage in these endeavors be well trained and given
opportunities to maintain their skills at the highest level possible. This requires training on a regular
basis. The following figure shows KFD personnel training for several different types of technical
rescue.
FIGURE 4-32: KFD Personnel Performing Training on Technical Rescue
The KFD is to be commended for this commitment to providing regional special operations
training and being considered a leader in this area, which CPSM considers to be a Best Practice.
193
OPERATIONAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The current state of the fire and EMS delivery system in Kalispell, from the operational perspective
of the KFD, which includes external factors such as available staffing, risk, future city growth,
development and redevelopment, available funding, and demand for service is, as analyzed
and observed by CPSM, as follows:
During this study, we observed a highly functional fire and EMS organization that strives to
provide an exceptional level of service to the community and the region.
The KFD is an excellent organization that provides a high-level of service to the city. The
command staff works as a team to provide critical, and it appears effective, leadership to the
department. Members of the department work as a team to produce a high-quality, effective,
and efficient response that serves the city well. The KFD is one of the better organizations that we
have evaluated. It should also be noted that the department has implemented several Best
Practices, as noted previously.
Over the past two years under the leadership of the new Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief the
KFD has:
■ Ordered a new engine.
■ Ordered a new ambulance.
■ Procured new personal protective equipment (PPE) for all personnel. All KFD personnel now
have two sets of PPE, which is the industry standard.
■ Obtained new state-of-the-art self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) along with an air
compressor and fill station.
■ Remodeled the dormitories at Station 61.
■ Reengaged with Montana Department of Natural Resources for wildland fires.
■ Updated station physical fitness areas.
■ KFD personnel have become more involved at the state level in various areas, which helps to
boost morale.
From all accounts, once they arrive on the scene of an emergency, KFD personnel perform their
duties in an exceptional manner and can be counted upon to complete effectively and
efficiently the assignments given to them. This is the case even when they have less than
adequate staffing to assemble a recommended ERF for almost any type of structure fire in the
city. They are to be commended for their efforts and given the support they need to continue to
try to be successful.
The City of Kalispell has an ISO rating of Class 3, one of the higher ratings achievable, and one of
only 11 in Montana. This is a satisfactory score (and class), yet there are areas for improvement.
There is a caveat to this, in that the overall points from the most recent evaluation in 2020 fell
1.94 points since 2015. The current rating puts the city just 0.69 points into the Class 3/3Y rating. If
the rating declines again, the city will most likely drop to a Class 4 rating.
The above opinions of the CPSM team notwithstanding, the KFD is confronted by many of the
challenges that are facing fire service organizations across America. As the fire service has
entered an all-hazards environment, the public has come to expect increased knowledge, skill,
194
and ability from their firefighters, as well as a higher level of service and responsiveness. In
addition, the City of Kalispell has been experiencing significant and rapid growth for the past
several years, a trend that appears to have accelerated over the past several years (post
COVID-19). These challenges include:
■ With the current staffing levels the department in its most recent ISO evaluation received
significant point deficiency in Credit for Company Personnel, receiving only 7.41 out of 15.00
possible points. This score fell nearly one point from the previous 2015 evaluation.
■ When the KFD operates at true minimum staffing of just five personnel on duty, which
happened 10 times (2.7 percent of the time) in 2022, there is just a single fire suppression unit
and single ambulance staffed. This provides a false sense of security that the department will
be able to handle the normal daily workload much less a significant incident on a high-
activity day.
■ Even at a staffing level of six, only two units are staffed for all fire and EMS responses, either two
fire suppression units or one fire unit and one EMS unit.
■ When a single fire response unit is available, with staffing of three personnel, tactical fire and
rescue options will be limited.
■ When staffing is at five or six the EMS unit that is staffed responds out of Station 62, which
increases the response time for the ambulance into Station 61’s area, which is nearly twice as
busy. When this occurs the fire suppression unit (Ladder 642) is out of service.
■ When staffing is at six and a second EMS incident comes in, the remaining fire suppression unit
(Engine 631) responds to this incident to provide patient care until a mutual aid ambulance
arrives. When this occurs, there is no fire suppression unit available for immediate response.
■ When staffing is at six or seven, there may be no EMS transport unit readily available if both fire
units are out on a fire-related incident.
■ There is no dedicated EMS unit staffed until staffing reaches eight personnel, which happened
just 49 times (13.4 percent) in 2022.
■ When responding to any incident with the potential for personnel to encounter an IDLH, units
with staffing of three personnel have fewer tactical fire options until the arrival of additional
personnel and resources. In a worst-case scenario when staffing is at five personnel, if two are
committed on an ambulance, the remainder of the on-duty staff would be unable to enter an
IDLH until the arrival of one of the chiefs or a mutual aid unit.
■ When units respond with just three personnel, the officers must assist with tasks such as
stretching a line and therefore cannot properly perform duties such as initial size-up. In
addition, the crews of two companies may need to be combined to accomplish tasks that a
single engine should be able to perform, such as advancing a line to the upper floors of a
building.
■ Even at its maximum potential on duty staffing level of 11 personnel, the KFD minimum is five or
six personnel short of the 16/17 recommended by NFPA 1710 as the benchmark for
establishing an Effective Response Force (ERF) based upon critical tasking for an average size
single-family dwelling.
■ In our 2018 evaluation, CPSM recommended that the City of Kalispell establish an on-duty
minimum staffing level in the KFD of seven personnel with eight being optimal. In 2022, the
KFD’s average daily on duty staffing was eight or more on just 49 days or 13.4 percent of the
time. This is a reduction from the 15 percent level in 2017/2018.
195
■ The current collective bargaining agreement allows 20 Kelly Days per member per year. This
allows those covered in the agreement a 46.77-hour work week. This was identified as an
impediment to proper staffing in our 2018 report.
■ The city has a limited number of fires; however, as analyzed in this report, the city does have a
significant level of risk.
■ Anytime a mutual aid EMS transport unit responds to Kalispell from a neighboring fire
department, such as Evergreen, Kalispell is not able to collect that EMS transport revenue.
■ Surrounding areas are increasingly relying on KFD for EMS, since the number of their available
volunteers, particularly on the EMS side, is declining.
■ Based on the KFD’s current deployment model, less than half of the city is within 240 seconds
of travel time for the first responding unit as recommended in NFPA 1710. However, the areas
that are covered include most of the most densely developed and populated areas of the
city. It also includes much of the call volume.
■ While there are a few pockets of the city that are not within 360 seconds of travel time for the
second arriving engine, about 75 percent to 80 percent of the city is covered.
■ The entire city is within a travel time of 480 seconds for structure fire responses. However, this
does not tell the whole story, as the city’s heavy reliance on automatic/mutual aid for all
reported structure fires will impact the arrival time of the entire first alarm assignment.
■ Most of the mutual aid can get into at least sections of Kalispell within 480 seconds of travel
time. However, unknown turnout times for non-staffed stations and depending upon where in
the city the incident is, will make it very difficult for Kalispell to meet the 480-second
benchmark.
■ The KFD has become a regional hub for special operations training and response; it hosts the
Northwest Montana Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team.
■ Call processing (at dispatch), turnout (in the station) times, and travel times are all higher than
recommended NFPA 1710 benchmarks.
■ Funding needs were prominently mentioned by many of the KFD stakeholders as a major
obstacle for them moving forward.
■ The city’s fire stations are in good condition, although Station 61 is less than optimal from both
an operational and an administrative standpoint.
■ As smaller, more rural communities struggle with declining volunteer memberships, the City of
Kalispell could become a hub for the regional delivery of fire and EMS services and/or shared
services.
■ The KFD has limited community risk reduction (CRR) and training capabilities due to limited
administrative/ support personnel, and in the latter case, a suitable training facility. The
administrative support functions of the KFD should be enhanced.
■ Nearly 25 percent of the population of the city falls into higher risk categories of 65 years old or
older (17.0 percent) and under age 5 (7.7 percent).
■ More than one in ten (10.5 percent) of the city’s residents live below the poverty line.
■ The city’s population has more than doubled since 2000. In 2018, The city planning
department predicted continued growth and development of around 2 percent per year
196
and 21 percent in the next decade. In reality, the population has increased about 19 percent
in just those five years, and 15.7 percent since 2020. This growth is expected to continue.
■ Almost every significant data point that was analyzed by CPSM for this study showed a
significant increase between 2018 and 2022. This includes population, calls, runs, EMS
transports, and response times. The following table illustrates a comparison of major data
points between 2018 and 2022 (depicted in the next table).
□ Of particular note: total calls increased by 23.5 percent; total runs increased by
28.2 percent.
□ Various response time metrics increased by between 4.6 percent and 38.3 percent.
TABLE 4-23: Kalispell/KFD Data Comparison, 2018 and 2022
Data Point 2018 2022 Increase
Population (residents) 23,950 28,450 4,500 / +19%
Area of City 11.64 Square Miles
(2010)
12.43 Square Miles
(2020)
0.79/ +6.8%
Population Density 1,712.6 (2010) 1,976.3 (2020) 263.7/ +15.4%
Population (transient) 803,000 1,900,000 1,097,000 / +137%
Persons over the age of 65 15% 17 % +2%
Nursing Homes/Skilled Care
Facilities
5 12 7/ +140%
Calls for Service 3,477 4,293 816 / +23.5%
EMS 2,567 3,067 500 / +19.5%
Transports 1,606 2,042 436 / +27.1%
Fire 506 670 164 / +32.4%
Other Calls (Mutual Aid +
Cancelled)
404 556 152/ +37.6%
Total Runs 4,607 5,908 1,301/ +28.2%
EMS 3,454 4,461 1,007/ +29.2%
Fire 680 782 102/ +15%
Other Calls 473 665 192/ +40.6%
Workload/Deployed Hours 2,548.1 3,3034.2 486.1/ +19.1%
EMS 2,048.3 2,463.9 415.6/ +20.3%
Fire 290.4 320.3 29.9/ +10.3%
Other Calls 209.4 250.0 40.6/ +19.4%
Availability to Respond to Calls
First Due Station Responded 74.3% 79.6% +5.3%
First Due Station Arrived 70.1% 78.0% +7.9%
First Due Station Arrived First 65.6% 73.0% +7.4%
Travel and Response Times
EMS Average Travel Time 5.1 Minutes 5.7 Minutes 0.7/ +13.7%
Fire Average Travel Time 4.7 Minutes 6.5 Minutes 1.8/ +38.3%
Total Average Travel Time 5.0 Minutes 5.8 Minutes 0.8/ +16%
EMS 90th Percentile Travel
Time 8.8 Minutes 9.2 Minutes 0.4/ +4.6%
197
Data Point 2018 2022 Increase
Fire 90th Percentile Travel Time 8.5 Minutes 10.4 Minutes 1.9/ +22.4%
Total 90th Percentile Travel
Time 8.8 minutes 9.6 Minutes 0.8/ +9.1%
Fire Overall Average Total
Response Time 9.0 Minutes 10.6 Minutes 1.6/ +17.8%
Fire Overall 90th Percentile
Total response Time 13.5 Minutes 15.3 Minutes 1.8/ +13.3%
There is no “right” amount of fire protection and EMS delivery. It is a constantly changing level
based on such things as the expressed needs of the community, community risk, and population
growth. Thus, in looking at response times it is prudent to design a deployment strategy around
the actual circumstances that exist in the community and the fire and/or problem that is
identified to exist. The strategic and tactical challenges presented by the widely varied hazards
that the department protects against need to be identified and planned for through a
community risk analysis planning and management process as identified in this report. It is
ultimately the responsibility of elected officials to determine the level of risk that is acceptable to
their respective community. Once the acceptable level of risk has been determined, then
operational service objectives can be established. Whether looking at acceptable risk, or level
of service objectives, it would be imprudent, and probably very costly, to build a deployment
strategy that is based solely upon response times.
As mentioned previously, during this study, CPSM observed a very functional fire and EMS
organization that strives to provide a high level of service to the community and the region. The
KFD is a very good organization that provides a high-level of service to the city. Members of the
department appear to work as a team to produce a high quality, effective, and efficient
response that serves the city well.
From all accounts, once they arrive on the scene of an emergency, KFD personnel perform their
duties in an exceptional manner and can be counted upon to complete assignments given to
them effectively and efficiently. This is the case even when they have less than adequate
staffing to assemble a recommended ERF for any type of structure in the city. They are
commended for their efforts and given the support they need to continue to try to be successful.
In formulating our recommendations CPSM has relied on several widely accepted references for
benchmarks and standards, industry best practices, as well as experience drawn from projects
across the United States. These references include:
■ The 9th Edition of the Fire and Emergency Service Self-Assessment Manual (FESSAM), @2015 by
the Center for Public Safety Excellence, Inc., Chantilly, Va.
■ Managing Fire and Emergency Services, @2012 by the International City-County Management
Association, 777 N. Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC.
■ National Fire Protection Association standards for deployment, EMS, safety, etc.
Fire Staffing and Deployment
In the 2018 study that CPSM completed for the City of Kalispell we suggested then that the
optimum daily staffing was eight personnel, in order to manage the potential fire risk identified
herein, and the EMS transport response when a second ambulance is needed. With the
significant increases in every statistical area that the city and fire department have experienced
in the ensuing five years, along with the expected continued rapid growth and development,
198
which will continue to drive increased requests for service from the KFD, we now believe that the
minimum on-duty staff should be increased to eight personnel on duty at all times as soon as
possible. Then over the next two years, the minimum on-duty staffing should gradually be
increased to ten personnel on duty at all times.
As CPSM has mentioned several times, we find the number of Kelly Days that are earned by KFD
members as part of the last several collective bargaining agreements to be much higher than
anything that we have encountered before. We understand that time off is important to the
members of the KFD. We also hesitate to delve too deeply into CBAs because we are not privy
to the give and take that occurred in the negotiating process to arrive at the final terms and
conditions. Conversely, we were also informed by many members of the KFD that their number
one concern is the department’s low staffing levels, particularly with increasing call volume.
Overtime, particularly forced or mandatory overtime, is also a concern. These situations conflict
with each other and will need to be discussed in great depth during the next contract
negotiations.
Section 7(k) of the FLSA provides that employees engaged in fire protection may be paid
overtime on a “work period” basis. A “work period” may be from 7 consecutive days to 28
consecutive days in length. For work periods of at least 7 but less than 28 days, overtime pay is
required when the number of hours worked exceeds the number of hours that bears the same
relationship to 212 (fire) as the number of days in the work period bears to 28. For example, fire
protection personnel are due overtime under such a plan after 106 hours worked during a 14-
day work period.
With a 28-day work period, the hours scheduled in a year are 2,912. (365/28=13.03 or 13 work
periods in a year; 56 hours/week x 4 = 224 hours in a 28-day work period; 224 x 13 =2,912 hours
scheduled in a year). Under 29 U.S.C 207(k), qualifying public agency fire suppression employees
working in excess of 53-hours/week shall be compensated at a rate of one and on-half times the
regular rate of pay.
Personnel working a straight three platoon system such as in Kalispell will average 56 hours a
week, so they will also average three hours per week in excess of the 53 hours. It should be kept
in mind that any leave hours taken during that time—vacation, personal, compensatory, sick,
etc.—can be subtracted from the FLSA hours calculation as leave time is considered to be “non-
productive” time. In addition, personnel are already being paid straight time for the three excess
hours, so what is owed to them by FLSA is, in reality, three hours at 0.5 their normal pay rate, or
1.5 hours total additional pay. The simplest, most straightforward way to deal with this, without
impacting on staffing, is to just pay personnel who exceed the working hours threshold the
overtime to which they are entitled.
If the city prefers to provide time off instead of monetary compensation, the city only needs to
reduce the productive hours by 12 in each 28-day cycle. With thirteen 28-day cycles in a year,
each KFD member who is on A, B, and C shifts (D shift personnel are not eligible) would be
eligible for 6.5 Kelly Days per year. Departments that utilize this system often award 7 days. If
Kalispell were to provide each eligible KFD member 7 Kelly Days per year, this would save 13
days per member, or 390 24-hour leave slots per year. This was the Kelly Day award prior to the
2015 CBA.
In order to reduce the hours worked further, some governing bodies/fire departments provide
their personnel with 12 Kelly Days per year, one each month, in essence reducing the number of
monthly shifts each person must work by one. Under this scenario, the city and KFD would save 8
days per member, or a total of 240 24-hour leave slots. Under this scenario, KFD personnel would
average 9 shifts on duty per month as opposed to 10 with no Kelly Days.
199
The city should consider an adjustment in the Kelly Days provision currently provided to eligible
fire staff and align more closely with what is required by law, which in a 28-day work period
where shift fire staff are scheduled for 224 hours is one 12-hour Kelly Day in the 28-day work
period to reduce the hours worked to 212, which is the overtime threshold for this work period.
Additional Facility Location Review
The placement of fire stations and location of responding units are key factors in reducing
response times and is a key performance measure in determining the efficiency of department
operations. The goal of placement of a single fire facility or creating a network of responding fire
stations in a single community is to optimize coverage with short travel distances (aka: “response
times”), when possible, while giving special attention to natural and manufactured barriers, and
response routes that can create response-time problems.
Likewise, current and potential for future demand for service is a consideration for the siting of
fire facilities. Demand is the number and types of calls for services provided by the entire fire
department. When demand is evaluated, it is important the number of incidents is not confused
with the number of unit responses. An emergency call may require the response of more than
one unit, but only one incident number is generated. This is a direct accelerator of demand.
CPSM measures a call as a single event, which may be handled by a single unit, and a run as a
response made by a unit to a call that involves more than one unit.
As discussed previously (and above), travel time (aka: response time) is key to understanding
how a fire facility location influences a community’s aggregate response time performance.
NFPA sets benchmark travel times for first arriving fire units as:104
■ ≤ 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company to a fire suppression incident 90 percent of
the time.
■ ≤ 240 seconds for the first arriving engine company with automated external defibrillator (AED)
or higher-level capability.
The NFPA also benchmarks the travel time of the second arriving unit on a fire incident, and the
travel time to assemble the first alarm assignment of apparatus and staff on low/medium
hazards as:
■ ≤ 360 seconds for the second company 90 percent of the time.
■ ≤ 480 seconds to assemble the initial first alarm assignment on scene 90 percent of the time for
low/medium hazards, 90 percent of the time.
As was identified earlier in this section, less than 50 percent of the City of Kalispell is within a travel
time of 240 seconds. The city has long-range plans for the potential addition of up to three fire
stations as the population and service needs increase. In light of the city’s continued rapid
growth and a quickly increasing call volume, the time has arrived for the city to begin the
process of constructing a new station 63.
104. NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency
Medical Operations and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments.
200
FIGURE 4-33: 240-Second Travel Time Bleeds with Proposed Station 63
The figure above shows 240-second travel bleeds with the potential addition of Fire Station 62 on
city-owned land at Farm to Market Road and Mountain Vista Way in the western part of the city.
This is an area that is experiencing a significant amount of residential development. The addition
of this station significantly enhances the 240-second coverage for the city, particularly in an area
where there is significant residential development occurring and planned.
The next figure shows the 360-second travel time bleeds for the same three-station configuration.
The figure after that shows the ISO 1.5-mile engine company travel distances. While there are still
large gaps in this map, the addition of the third station does provide additional coverage that
will be beneficial (along with improved deployment and response times) in future ISO
evaluations.
201
FIGURE 4-34: KFD New Station 63 with 360-Second Travel Time Bleeds
FIGURE 4-35: KFD New Station 63 with ISO 1.5-Mile Engine Company Circles
The only concern that CPSM has regarding the location of this station—and we understand that
city-owned land is available—is how close it is to the western border of the city. While it provides
202
significant benefit to the city in a growing area, a large part of its reasonable first due response
area will be located outside of the city. Conversely, if the city eventually annexes additional
land in this area into the city, this station will be well-positioned to provide coverage.
CPSM suggests that once this station is completed, that the quint/ladder could be relocated
here as we believe that will provide better coverage throughout the city. The next figure shows
the ISO 2.5-mile ladder company circle from Station 63.
FIGURE 4-36: KFD New Station 63 with ISO 2.5-Mile Ladder Company Circle
Long term, the city also has very tentative plans to eventually construct two additional stations if
needed. These stations would be located as follows:
■ Station 64 – In the southern part of Kalispell. There is currently no specific location, and no city-
owned land reserved.
■ Station 65 – In the northern part of Kalispell on city-owned land at Church Drive and
Silverbrook Drive.
The following figure illustrates the potential future five-station configuration.
203
FIGURE 4-37: KFD Five-Station Configuration
Regarding Station 64, the Fire Chief would like to consider relocating Station 61 and constructing
a new headquarters station south of the existing downtown area. This would eliminate the need
for a Station 64 by essentially combining Station 61 and a future Station 64 into one new facility.
While no site has been identified for this facility, the suggestion was made regarding an area of
the airport and wastewater facility would be a possible location. This is in the vicinity of 1800-1900
Airport Road. The next figure shows this configuration with the new Station 63 and a relocated
Station 61.
204
FIGURE 4-38: KFD Relocated Station 61 and new Station 63 with 240-Second
Travel Time Bleeds
While a methodology of “surrounding the demand and responding to the demand” from
multiple directions is a viable alternative in some scenarios, it is our opinion that that is not the
proper approach here. As illustrated, with this station relocated, much of the downtown area,
where this is heavy call volume and high fire risk, is now outside of 240 seconds of travel time.
Conversely, the southern part of the city has relatively low call volume and lower risk.
Even at 300 seconds, so a minute longer, much of downtown Kalispell remains outside this travel
time. It is not until we reach 360 seconds that the entire area is covered. While it is ultimately up
to the city to decide whether this option is a viable one, at this time, and with the information
available to us, this does not appear to be an option that CPSM would recommend or endorse.
However, since any move like this is realistically probably five to ten years in the future, a lot can
change that may warrant relocating Station 61 or simply adding a new Station 64.
205
FIGURE 4-39: KFD Relocated Station 61 with 300-Second Travel Time Bleeds
FIGURE 4-40: KFD Relocated Station 61 with 360-Second Travel Time Bleeds
206
Regionalization
As an urban island protected by a career fire department and surrounded by mostly volunteer
or paid-on-call fire departments, the KFD (or the Kalispell and Whitefish fire departments) would
provide a great foundation for a potential regional firefighting endeavor in Flathead County.
The City of Kalispell could be the catalyst for such an endeavor and initiate discussions with
surrounding municipalities. Regional collaboration opens the potential for shared services
related to the provision of emergency services.
The idea of giving up total local control is always a proposition that gives elected officials, and
their constituents pause and has been one of the obstacles to true regionalization or
consolidation, particularly where small community pride and the time-honored concept of
home rule are deeply ingrained in the culture. However, the constantly escalating costs of
attempting to provide even a status quo service level is becoming increasingly difficult. Tax
dollars are being stretched to the limit. Smaller communities that have far fewer resources and
options than their larger neighbors will find it especially difficult to cope within the limitations
imposed by the new financial reality. The continuing trend of declining volunteerism will create
simultaneous challenges that will stretch the provision of emergency services in many
communities even farther.
During our field visit to Kalispell, and our interviews with stakeholders, CPSM was informed that a
bill had been introduced in the Montana legislature (House Bill No. 813 “An Act Authorizing the
Creation of Regional Fire Protection Authorities”) that would permit the formation of regional fire
authorities in Montana. The bill was scheduled for a hearing in March 2023 but appeared to stall
after that. There has been no further movement on it.
A regional fire authority (abbreviated to RFA) is a special purpose district created by the vote of
the people residing in the proposed district. Its boundaries are usually—but not always—
coextensive with two or more adjacent fire protection jurisdictions. It is considered a municipal
corporation, an independent taxing authority, and a taxing district.
In simple terms it is a cooperative agreement between government entities or municipalities to
provide fire and emergency services. The authority is governed by a Board of Directors
appointed by the participating governments.
Once established, the RFA governing board is established and consists of elected officials of the
participating municipalities. These governing board members generally consist of:
■ Current elected officials from the participating jurisdictions, such as city councilmembers or
Township Trustees; and/or,
■ Regional fire commissioners who are elected by the voters of the regional fire authority.
■ A combination of the above may be permitted.
Advantages of this alternative include:
■ Kalispell would likely maintain the majority ownership stake on any Kalispell-centric RFA.
However, other potential partners would also have a stake and direct representation on the
RFA board through the provision of a representative governing board.
■ Provides stable and sustainable funding.
■ Predictable revenue sources and options to provide for current and future fire operation
needs.
207
■ Allows for future expansion to better regionalize the delivery of fire and EMS services in the
greater Kalispell area.
CPSM does not recommend this as a primary option particularly since RFAs are not currently
authorized in Montana. However, what we do recommend is that the governing body in
Kalispell lobby their local legislators to approve this legislation. If successful, it would provide the
city with one additional long-term option to explore regarding maintaining a high-quality and
sustainable fire and EMS delivery system that is financially supported by all users
Planning Recommendations and Considerations:
■ CPSM recommends that as a planning objective that over the next three fiscal years the city
enhance KFD staffing levels as shown here. (Recommendation No. 51.)
□ Year 1 – Increase minimum on-duty staffing to 8 personnel.
● Hire one additional firefighter and reassign current D Platoon firefighters to A, B, and C
Platoons to increase maximum shift staffing to 11 personnel.
● Separate the training and safety functions from the Assistant Fire Chief position and
create and fill a position of Training and Safety Officer at the rank of Captain.
● Upgrade the position of EMS Coordinator from a part-time to a full time position at the
rank of Captain.
● Total additional positions = three (3).
□ Year 2 – Add one additional firefighter per shift (three total positions) and increase minimum
on-duty staffing to nine personnel at all times. The maximum shift staffing would be
12 personnel.
□ Year 3 – Add one additional firefighter per shift (three total positions) and increase minimum
on-duty staffing to 10 personnel at all times. This will allow the city to staff two ambulances
and two fire suppression units 24/7. Having the ability to staff two EMS units 24/7 will eliminate
the need for most EMS mutual aid into the city, which will reduce potential revenue loss. The
maximum shift staffing would be 13 personnel.
Deployment of personnel at each staffing increment would be as follows:
8 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 3
Ladder w/ 3
or
Ambulance w/ 3
9 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 4
Ladder w/ 4
and/or
2 Ambulances w/ 2
10 Personnel 5 Engine w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2 5 Ladder w/ 3
Ambulance w/ 2
■ As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that the City of Kalispell consider options for the
next CBA negotiations with the goal of aligning Kelly Day hours with the FLSA work period as
outlined in 29 U.S.C 207(k) and utilize this alignment to help increase on-duty staffing.
(Recommendation No. 52.)
■ As a planning objective, CPSM further recommends the city review all options for increasing
EMS revenues. This should include the continual review of in-house EMS billing to ensure
208
collection of revenues is maximized to the fullest extent allowable by law, with a focus on
closing the gap between billed services and collected revenues; consideration of service fees
with areas outside of the city boundaries that the KFD provides EMS transport to; and
reconsideration of the city EMS tax levy at a rate sufficient to offset general fund transfers
needed to sustain the ambulance fund. (Recommendation No. 53.)
■ As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that the City of Kalispell proceed with plans for
the construction of Fire Station 63 in its proposed location at Farm to Market Drive and
Mountain Vista Drive. (Recommendation No. 54.)
Once this station is ready to go in service, CPSM recommends:
□ The quint/ladder from Station 62 be relocated from Station 62.
□ Equipment to be deployed from this station would be the quint/ladder and an ambulance.
□ Initial staffing would be three personnel per shift (nine additional personnel) who would cross
staff the fire suppression unit and the ambulance as needed.
□ Station 61 would continue to be staffed with five personnel who would staff an engine and
an ambulance.
□ Station 62 would continue to be staffed with five personnel who would staff an engine and
an ambulance.
■ The City of Kalispell leadership, both city and fire department, should lobby their local
legislators to seek passage of House Bill 813 that would allow the creation of regional fire
authorities. (Recommendation No. 55.)
■ As a planning objective, CPSM recommends that with the opening of Station 63, the City of
Kalispell should create a position of Shift Commander (three additional positions) who would
serve as the on-duty shift commander and respond in a command vehicle to incidents.
(Recommendation No. 56.)
A proposed organizational chart illustrating all of the above recommendations follows
§ § §
209
FIGURE 4-41: Recommended Long-Term KFD Organizational Structure
§ § §
210
SECTION 5. DATA ANALYSIS
This data analysis examines all calls for service between January 1, 2018, and December 31,
2022, as recorded in Flathead County 9-1-1 Communications Center’s computer-aided dispatch
(CAD) system and KFD’s National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS).
The main analysis focuses on calls that occurred in the one-year period. A trend analysis of calls
responded to by KFD and the corresponding workload from 2018 to 2022 is presented in
Attachment IV. The workload of Logan Health ambulances is examined in Attachment V.
This analysis is made up of five parts. The first part focuses on call types and dispatches. The
second part explores the time spent and the workload of individual units. The third part presents
an analysis of the busiest hours in the year studied. The fourth part provides a response time
analysis of KFD units. The fifth and final part is an analysis of unit transport.
The Kalispell Fire Department serves a population of about 25,500 people in an area of
approximately 12.6 square miles. KFD is an all-hazards response fire department, providing
service and protection for fire and medical emergencies, hazardous material responses, vehicle
accidents, and other incidents where life and property are threatened. The KFD staffs a
complement of 32 personnel. It operates out of two fire stations, utilizing three ALS ambulances,
a frontline engine, a reserve engine, a 105-foot ladder truck, a water tender, a support unit, a
wildland unit, and two administrative vehicles.
Between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022, the Kalispell Fire Department responded to
4,293 calls, of which 71 percent were EMS calls. The total combined workload (deployed time)
for KFD units was 3,034.2 hours. The average dispatch time was 2.5 minutes, and the average
total response time was 9.7 minutes. The 90th percentile dispatch time was 4.4 minutes and the
90th percentile total response time was 14.3 minutes.
211
METHODOLOGY
In this report, CPSM analyzes calls and runs. A call is an emergency service request or incident.
A run is a dispatch of a unit (i.e., a unit responding to a call). Thus, a call may include multiple
runs.
We received CAD data and NFIRS data for the Kalispell Fire Department. We first matched the
NFIRS and CAD data based on the incident numbers provided. Then, we classified the calls into
a series of steps. We first used the NFIRS incident type to identify canceled calls and to assign
emergency medical service (EMS), motor vehicle accident (MVA), and fire category call types.
EMS calls were then assigned detailed categories based on their Criteria Based Dispatch (CBD)
codes and descriptions. The type of calls that occurred outside KFD’s fire district were identified
as mutual aid. The method to categorize incident types is shown in Attachment VI.
We received records for 4,469 total calls that were made between January 1, 2022, and
December 31, 2022. We removed two test calls, four calls lacking a responding KFD unit, and
167 calls to which a unit was dispatched but did not go en route or arrive on scene. Three calls
that involved only administrative units were not included in the main analysis. The work
associated with these calls is included in the analysis of additional personnel in Attachment I.
212
AGGREGATE CALL TOTALS
Between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022, KFD responded to 4,293 calls, of which
26 were structure fire calls and 25 were outside fire calls.
Calls by Type
The following table and two figures show the number of calls by call type, average calls per day,
and the percentage of calls that fall into each call type category for the year studied.
TABLE 5-1: Call Types
Call Type Total Calls Calls per
Day
Call
Percentage
Breathing difficulty 244 0.7 5.7
Cardiac and stroke 304 0.8 7.1
Fall and injury 502 1.4 11.7
Illness and other 1,276 3.5 29.7
MVA 164 0.4 3.8
Overdose and psychiatric 121 0.3 2.8
Seizure and unconsciousness 456 1.2 10.6
EMS Subtotal 3,067 8.4 71.4
False alarm 217 0.6 5.1
Good intent 44 0.1 1.0
Hazard 95 0.3 2.2
Outside fire 25 0.1 0.6
Public service 263 0.7 6.1
Structure fire 26 0.1 0.6
Fire Subtotal 670 1.8 15.6
Canceled 319 0.9 7.4
Mutual aid* 237 0.6 5.5
Total 4,293 11.8 100.0
Note: *Calls that occurred outside KFD’s response area were labeled as mutual aid. Out of 237 mutual aid calls, 54 were
canceled.
213
FIGURE 5-1: EMS Calls by Type
FIGURE 5-2: Fire Calls by Type
214
Observations:
Overall
■ The department received an average of 11.8 calls, including 0.9 canceled and 0.6 mutual aid
calls, per day.
EMS
■ EMS calls for the year totaled 3,067 (71 percent of all calls), an average of 8.4 per day.
■ Illness and other calls were the largest category of EMS calls at 42 percent of EMS calls, an
average of 3.5 calls per day.
■ Cardiac and stroke calls made up 10 percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.8 calls per day.
■ Motor vehicle accidents made up five percent of EMS calls, an average of 0.4 calls per day.
Fire
■ Fire calls for the year totaled 670 (16 percent of all calls), an average of 1.8 per day.
■ Public service calls were the largest category of fire calls at 39 percent of fire calls, an
average of 0.7 calls per day.
■ False alarm calls made up 32 percent of fire calls, an average of 0.6 calls per day.
■ Structure and outside fire calls combined made up eight percent of fire calls, an average of
0.1 calls per day, or one call every seven days.
215
Calls by Type and Duration
The following table shows the duration of calls by type using four duration categories: less than
30 minutes, 30 minutes to one hour, one to two hours, and more than two hours.
TABLE 5-2: Calls by Type and Duration
Call Type Less than
30 Minutes
30 Minutes
to One Hour
One to Two
Hours
Two or More
Hours Total
Breathing difficulty 55 166 21 2 244
Cardiac and stroke 84 191 26 3 304
Fall and injury 154 296 49 3 502
Illness and other 414 725 129 8 1,276
MVA 96 45 20 3 164
Overdose and psychiatric 35 72 13 1 121
Seizure and unconsciousness 150 261 42 3 456
EMS Subtotal 988 1,756 300 23 3,067
False alarm 179 37 0 1 217
Good intent 39 4 0 1 44
Hazard 65 24 6 0 95
Outside fire 14 8 3 0 25
Public service 218 37 7 1 263
Structure fire 8 8 5 5 26
Fire Subtotal 523 118 21 8 670
Canceled 311 4 4 0 319
Mutual aid 78 99 54 6 237
Total 1,900 1,977 379 37 4,293
Observations:
EMS
■ On average, 0.9 EMS calls per day lasted more than one hour.
■ A total of 2,744 EMS calls (89 percent) lasted less than one hour, 300 EMS calls (10 percent)
lasted one to two hours, and 23 EMS calls (one percent) lasted two or more hours.
Fire
■ On average, 0.1 fire calls per day lasted more than one hour.
■ A total of 641 fire calls (96 percent) lasted less than one hour, 21 fire calls (three percent)
lasted one to two hours, and eight fire calls (one percent) lasted two or more hours.
■ A total of 22 outside fire calls (88 percent) lasted less than one hour and three outside fire calls
(12 percent) lasted one to two hours.
■ A total of 16 structure fire calls (62 percent) lasted less than one hour, five structure fire calls
(19 percent) lasted one to two hours, and five structure fire calls (19 percent) lasted two or
more hours.
216
Calls by Month and Hour of Day
Figure 5-3 shows the monthly variation in the average daily number of calls handled by the KFD
between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022. Similarly, Figure 5-4 illustrates the average
number of calls received each hour of the day over the year.
FIGURE 5-3: Calls by Month
Observations:
■ Average EMS calls per day ranged from 7.3 in September 2022 to 9.8 in January 2022.
■ Average fire calls per day ranged from 1.1 in February 2022 to 2.5 in August 2022.
■ Average total calls per day overall ranged from 10.3 in February 2022 to 13.5 in December
2022.
217
FIGURE 5-4: Calls by Hour of Day
Observations:
■ Average EMS calls per hour ranged from 0.15 between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. to
0.54 between noon and 1:00 p.m.
■ Average fire calls per hour ranged from 0.02 between 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. to
0.13 between 11:00 a.m. and noon.
■ Average total calls per hour overall ranged from 0.21 between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. to
0.72 between noon and 1:00 p.m.
218
Units Arrived at Calls
Table 5-3, along with Figures 5-5 and 5-6, detail the number of calls with one, two, and three or
more KFD units arriving at a call, broken down by call type. In this section, we limit ourselves to
calls where a KFD unit arrives.
TABLE 5-3: Calls by Call Type and Number of Arriving Units
Call Type
Number of Units Total
Calls One Two Three or
More
Breathing difficulty 125 117 0 242
Cardiac and stroke 130 172 0 302
Fall and injury 360 139 0 499
Illness and other 883 373 1 1,257
MVA 71 85 4 160
Overdose and psychiatric 89 32 0 121
Seizure and unconsciousness 276 171 0 447
EMS Subtotal 1,934 1,089 5 3,028
False alarm 209 4 0 213
Good intent 35 2 0 37
Hazard 83 5 2 90
Outside fire 19 5 1 25
Public service 230 19 1 250
Structure fire 14 8 3 25
Fire Subtotal 590 43 7 640
Canceled 130 12 0 142
Mutual aid 182 12 1 195
Total 2,836 1,156 13 4,005
Percentage 70.8 28.9 0.3 100.0
Note: Only calls with arriving KFD units were considered. There were 288 calls where a KFD unit recorded an en route time
but no unit recorded an arrival time. This included 177 canceled calls, 42 mutual aid calls, 39 EMS calls, and 30 fire calls.
219
FIGURE 5-5: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – EMS
FIGURE 5-6: Calls by Number of Units Arriving – Fire
220
Observations:
Overall
■ On average, 1.3 KFD units arrived at all calls; for 70.8 percent of calls, only one unit arrived.
EMS
■ On average, 1.4 units arrived per EMS call.
■ For EMS calls, one unit arrived 63.9 percent of the time, two units arrived 36.0 percent of the
time, and three units arrived 0.2 percent of the time.
Fire
■ On average, 1.1 units arrived per fire call.
■ For fire calls, one unit arrived 92.2 percent of the time, two units arrived 6.7 percent of the time,
and three units arrived 1.1 percent of the time.
■ For outside fire calls, three units arrived 4.0 percent of the time.
■ For structure fire calls, three units arrived 12.0 percent of the time.
221
WORKLOAD: RUNS AND TOTAL TIME SPENT
The workload of each KFD unit is measured in two ways: runs and deployed time. The deployed
time of a run is measured from the time a unit is dispatched through the time the unit is cleared.
Because multiple units respond to some calls, there are more runs (5,908) than calls (4,293) and
the average deployed time per run varies from the total duration of calls.
Runs and Deployed Time – All Units
Deployed time, also referred to as deployed hours, is the total deployment time of all units
deployed on all runs. Table 5-4 shows the total deployed time, both overall and broken down by
type of run, for KFD units between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022. Table 5-5 and
Figure 5-7 present the average deployed minutes by hour of day.
TABLE 5-4: Annual Runs and Deployed Time by Run Type
Run Type Minutes
per Run
Annual
Hours
Percent
of Hours
Minutes
per Day
Annual
Runs
Runs
per Day
Breathing difficulty 34.8 221.9 7.3 36.5 383 1.0
Cardiac and stroke 33.1 280.4 9.2 46.1 509 1.4
Fall and injury 34.3 386.6 12.7 63.6 677 1.9
Illness and other 33.4 975.8 32.2 160.4 1,753 4.8
MVA 26.2 135.1 4.5 22.2 309 0.8
Overdose and psychiatric 33.6 92.4 3.0 15.2 165 0.5
Seizure and unconsciousness 33.5 371.7 12.3 61.1 665 1.8
EMS Subtotal 33.1 2,463.9 81.2 405.0 4,461 12.2
False alarm 20.8 80.6 2.7 13.2 232 0.6
Good intent 18.8 16.0 0.5 2.6 51 0.1
Hazard 27.1 48.7 1.6 8.0 108 0.3
Outside fire 34.6 18.5 0.6 3.0 32 0.1
Public service 20.3 105.7 3.5 17.4 313 0.9
Structure fire 66.5 50.9 1.7 8.4 46 0.1
Fire Subtotal 24.6 320.3 10.6 52.7 782 2.1
Canceled 9.0 60.3 2.0 9.9 401 1.1
Mutual aid 43.1 189.7 6.3 31.2 264 0.7
Other Subtotal 22.6 250.0 8.2 41.1 665 1.8
Total 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8 5,908 16.2
222
Observations:
Overall
■ The total deployed time for the year was 3,034.2 hours. The daily average was 498.8 minutes
for all units combined.
■ There were 5,908 runs, including 401 runs dispatched for canceled calls and 264 runs
dispatched for mutual aid calls. The daily average was 16.2 runs.
EMS
■ EMS runs accounted for 81 percent of the total workload.
■ The average deployed time for EMS runs was 33.1 minutes. The deployed time for all EMS runs
averaged 405.0 minutes per day.
Fire
■ Fire runs accounted for 11 percent of the total workload.
■ The average deployed time for fire runs was 24.6 minutes. The deployed time for all fire runs
averaged 52.7 minutes per day.
■ There were 78 runs for structure and outside fire calls combined, with a total workload of
69.4 hours. This accounted for two percent of the total workload.
■ The average deployed time for outside fire runs was 34.6 minutes per run, and the average
deployed time for structure fire runs was 66.5 minutes per run.
223
TABLE 5-5: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day
Hour EMS Fire Other Total
0 9.9 1.5 1.0 12.4
1 8.6 1.6 0.8 11.0
2 6.8 2.1 1.6 10.4
3 7.0 2.0 1.7 10.8
4 8.5 1.5 1.4 11.4
5 9.8 0.9 0.9 11.6
6 9.6 1.4 0.8 11.7
7 11.7 2.4 0.9 15.0
8 18.5 1.8 1.3 21.6
9 21.2 2.2 2.0 25.4
10 22.3 2.5 2.2 27.0
11 20.0 3.9 1.5 25.4
12 25.7 3.3 2.2 31.1
13 25.0 2.2 2.4 29.6
14 22.2 3.0 2.7 27.9
15 25.4 2.8 2.1 30.3
16 22.2 2.8 1.8 26.8
17 23.4 3.4 3.0 29.8
18 21.3 3.3 2.5 27.2
19 18.8 2.3 1.5 22.5
20 20.3 1.5 2.1 23.9
21 18.8 1.8 2.0 22.5
22 14.4 1.3 1.9 17.6
23 13.4 1.3 0.8 15.5
Daily Avg. 405.0 52.7 41.1 498.8
224
FIGURE 5-7: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day
Observations:
■ Hourly deployed time was highest during the day from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., averaging from
25.4 to 31.1 minutes.
■ Average deployed time peaked between noon and 1:00 p.m., averaging 31.1 minutes.
■ Average deployed time was the lowest between 2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m., averaging 10.4
minutes.
225
Workload by Unit
Table 5-6 summarizes the annual workload of KFD units. Tables 5-7 and 5-8 provide a more
detailed view of the workload for each unit, showing each unit’s runs (Table 5-7) and the
resulting daily average deployed time (Table 5-8) by run type.
TABLE 5-6: Runs and Workload by Station and Unit
Station Unit Unit Type Minutes
per Run
Total
Hours
Total
Percent
Minutes
per Day
Total
Runs
Runs per
Day
61
621 ALS Ambulance 37.8 414.1 13.6 68.1 657 1.8
631 Engine 21.9 822.5 27.1 135.2 2,254 6.2
Subtotal 25.5 1,236.6 40.8 203.3 2,911 8.0
62
622 ALS Ambulance 36.2 1,286.3 42.4 211.4 2,132 5.8
624 ALS Ambulance 35.7 447.6 14.8 73.6 752 2.1
642 Ladder 34.0 60.0 2.0 9.9 106 0.3
682 Wildland Unit 31.8 3.7 0.1 0.6 7 0.0
Subtotal 36.0 1,797.6 59.2 295.5 2,997 8.2
Total 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8 5,908 16.2
TABLE 5-7: Annual Runs by Run Type, Station, and Unit
Station Unit EMS False
Alarm
Good
Intent Hazard Outside
Fire
Public
Service
Structure
Fire Cancel Mutual
aid Total
61
621 564 1 0 1 0 26 3 35 27 657
631 1,475 190 35 78 23 186 25 193 49 2,254
Subtotal 2,039 191 35 79 23 212 28 228 76 2,911
62
622 1,792 8 6 6 2 64 4 123 127 2,132
624 605 8 4 6 0 29 1 45 54 752
642 25 25 6 17 2 7 13 5 6 106
682 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 7
Subtotal 2,422 41 16 29 9 101 18 173 188 2,997
Total 4,461 232 51 108 32 313 46 401 264 5,908
226
TABLE 5-8: Deployed Minutes per Day by Run Type, Station, and Unit
Station Unit EMS False
Alarm
Good
Intent Hazard Outside
Fire
Public
Service
Structure
Fire Cancel Mutual
aid Total
61
621 62.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.8 2.5 68.1
631 89.5 10.8 1.9 5.6 2.1 10.3 4.4 5.1 5.5 135.2
Subtotal 152.2 10.8 1.9 5.6 2.1 11.8 4.9 5.9 8.0 203.3
62
622 186.9 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.3 3.6 1.3 2.9 15.5 211.4
624 64.1 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.0 1.5 0.1 1.0 6.1 73.6
642 1.8 1.8 0.3 1.6 0.1 0.5 2.1 0.1 1.5 9.9
682 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6
Subtotal 252.9 2.4 0.7 2.4 1.0 5.6 3.5 4.0 23.1 295.5
Total 405.0 13.2 2.6 8.0 3.0 17.4 8.4 9.9 31.2 498.8
Observations:
■ Station 61 made the second most runs (2,911, or an average of 8.0 runs per day) and had the
second-highest total annual deployed time (1,236.6, or an average of 3.4 hours per day).
□ EMS calls accounted for 70 percent of runs and 75 percent of the total deployed time.
□ Structure and outside fire calls accounted for two percent of runs and three percent of the
total deployed time.
■ Station 62 made the most runs (2,997, or an average of 8.2 runs per day) and had the highest
total annual deployed time (1,797.6, or an average of 4.9 hours per day).
□ EMS calls accounted for 81 percent of runs and 86 percent of the total deployed time.
□ Structure and outside fire calls accounted for one percent of runs and one percent of the
total deployed time.
■ Engine 631 made the most runs (2,254, or an average of 6.2 runs per day) and had the
second-highest total annual deployed time (822.5 hours, or an average of 2.3 hours per day).
□ EMS calls accounted for 65 percent of runs and 66 percent of the total deployed time.
□ Structure and outside fire calls accounted for two percent of runs and five percent of the
total deployed time.
■ Ambulance 622 made the second most runs (2,132, or an average of 5.8 runs per day) and
had the highest total annual deployed time (1,286.3 hours, or an average of 3.5 hours per
day).
□ EMS calls accounted for 84 percent of runs and 88 percent of the total deployed time.
□ Structure and outside fire calls accounted for one percent of the total deployed time.
227
Workload by Fire District
Table 5-9 breaks down the workload of KFD by each station’s first due station area or by external
fire district where the calls occurred. Table 5-10 provides further detail on the workload
associated with structure and outside fire calls, also broken down by fire district.
TABLE 5-9: Annual Workload by District
District / Station
Area Calls Percent
Calls Runs Runs Per
Day
Minutes
Per Run
Work
Hours
Percent
Work
Minutes
Per Day
KFD Station 61 2,644 61.6 3,880 10.6 29.9 1,936.3 63.8 318.3
KFD Station 62 1,412 32.9 1,764 4.8 30.9 908.3 29.9 149.3
Evergreen FD 65 1.5 68 0.2 49.5 56.1 1.8 9.2
Smith Valley FD 17 0.4 18 0.0 41.9 12.6 0.4 2.1
South Kalispell FD 58 1.4 67 0.2 33.0 36.8 1.2 6.1
West Valley FD 83 1.9 97 0.3 48.2 77.9 2.6 12.8
Other* 14 0.3 14 0.0 27.1 6.3 0.2 1.0
Total 4,293 100.0 5,908 16.2 30.8 3,034.2 100.0 498.8
Note: *The 14 calls that occurred in “Other” districts include five calls in Whitefish, two calls in Creston, and one call each in Badrock North, Bigfork, C. Falls, Glacier, Hungry Horse, the South Kalispell / Kalispell corner quadrant, and Somers fire districts, respectively.
TABLE 5-10: Runs for Structure and Outside Fires by District
District / Station
Area
Structure Fires Outside Fires Combined
Runs Minutes
per Run
Run
s
Minutes
per Run
Annual
Hours
Percen
t Work
KFD Station 61 36 76.7 28 36.3 63.0 62.9
KFD Station 62 10 29.4 4 23.2 6.5 6.5
Evergreen FD 12 108.0 0 NA 21.6 21.6
Smith Valley FD 4 64.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
South Kalispell FD 0 NA 1 26.4 0.4 0.4
West Valley FD 2 130.0 0 NA 4.3 4.3
Total 64 76.1 33 34.4 100.1 100.0
228
Observations:
KFD Station 61’s Response Area
■ There were 2,644 calls or 62 percent of the total calls.
■ There were 3,880 runs, including 284 runs dispatched for canceled calls. The daily average was
10.6 runs.
■ The total deployed time for the year was 1,936.3 hours or 64 percent of the total annual
workload. The daily average was 5.3 hours for all units combined.
KFD Station 62’s Response Area
■ There were 1,412 calls or 33 percent of the total calls.
■ There were 1,764 runs, including 117 runs dispatched for canceled calls. The daily average was
4.8 runs.
■ The total deployed time for the year was 908.3 hours or 30 percent of the total annual
workload. The daily average was 2.5 hours for all units combined.
Outside KFD District
■ There were 237 mutual aid calls or six percent of the total calls.
■ There were 264 runs, including 57 runs dispatched for canceled calls. The daily average was
0.7 runs.
■ The total deployed time for the year was 189.7 hours or six percent of the total annual
workload. The daily average was 31.7 minutes for all units combined.
229
ANALYSIS OF BUSIEST HOURS
For the 4,293 calls that were responded to by KFD between January 1, 2022, and December 31,
2022, there is significant variability in the number of calls from hour to hour. One special concern
relates to the resources available for hours with the heaviest workload. We tabulated the data
for each of the 8,760 hours in the year.
Table 5-11 shows the number of hours in the year in which there were zero to four or more calls
during the hour. Table 5-12 shows the 10 one-hour intervals which had the most calls during the
year. Table 5-13 examines the number of times a call within each KFD station’s first due area
overlapped with another call within the same area.
TABLE 5-11: Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls
Calls in an Hour Frequency Percentage
0 5,478 62.5
1 2,462 28.1
2 653 7.5
3 145 1.7
4+ 22 0.3
Total 8,760 100.0
TABLE 5-12: Top 10 Hours with the Most Calls Received
Hour Number of Calls Number of Runs Deployed Hours
11/2/2022, 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. 6 6 1.5
1/5/2022, 11:00 a.m. to noon 4 7 3.7
7/7/2022, 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4 7 3.1
1/19/2022, 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 4 7 3.0
10/6/2022, 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 4 7 2.7
4/10/2022, 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. 4 7 2.3
7/23/2022, 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. 4 6 3.6
12/5/2022, 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 4 6 3.4
11/7/2022, 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 4 6 2.5
9/2/2022, 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4 6 2.3
Note: Total deployed hours are a measure of the total time spent responding to calls received in the hour and may
extend into the next hour or hours. The number of runs and deployed hours were calculated based on all response units.
230
TABLE 5-13: Frequency of Overlapping Calls by First Due Station Area
First Due
Area Scenario Number of
Calls
Percent of
Calls
Total
Hours
61
No overlapped call 2,215 83.8 1,290.2
Overlapped with one call 392 14.8 119.0
Overlapped with two calls 37 1.4 6.3
62
No overlapped call 1,291 91.4 735.3
Overlapped with one call 120 8.5 35.6
Overlapped with two calls 1 0.1 0.1
Note: 237 mutual aid calls outside KFD’s fire district were not included.
Table 5-14 focuses on each KFD station’s availability to respond to calls within its first due area.
At the same time, it focuses on calls where a unit eventually arrived and ignores calls where no
unit arrived. Out of 4,056 total calls that are not mutual aid (Table 5-1), 3,810 calls had an arriving
unit.
TABLE 5-14: Station Availability to Respond to Calls
First Due
Area
Calls in
Area
First Due
Responded
Percent
Responded
First
Due
Arrived
Percent
Arrived
First Due
First
Percent
First
61 2,489 1,927 77.4 1,875 75.3 1,739 69.9
62 1,321 1,107 83.8 1,095 82.9 1,041 78.8
Total 3,810 3,034 79.6 2,970 78.0 2,780 73.0
Note: For each station, we count the number of calls within its first due area where at least one unit arrived. Next, we
focus on units from the first due station to see if any unit responded, arrived, or arrived first.
Observations:
■ During 22 hours (0.3 percent of all hours), four or more calls occurred; in other words, the
department responded to four or more calls in an hour roughly once every 17 days.
■ The highest number of calls to occur in an hour was six, which happened once.
■ The hour with the most calls was 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. on November 2, 2022. The hour’s six calls
involved six individual dispatches resulting in 1.5 hours of deployed time. These six calls
included three hazard calls and three public service calls.
231
RESPONSE TIME
In this part of the analysis, we present response time statistics for different call types. We separate
response time into its identifiable components. Dispatch time is the difference between the time
a call is received and the time a unit is dispatched. Dispatch time includes call processing time,
which is the time required to determine the nature of the emergency and the types of resources
to dispatch. Turnout time is the difference between dispatch time and the time a unit is en route
to a call’s location. Travel time is the difference between the time en route and arrival on scene.
Response time is the total time elapsed between receiving a call to arriving on scene.
In this analysis, we included all calls responded to by non-administrative KFD units while
excluding canceled, mutual aid, and non-emergency calls. In addition, calls with a total
response time of more than 30 minutes were excluded. Finally, we focused on units that had
complete time stamps, that is, units with all components recorded, so that we could calculate
each segment of response time. In this analysis, calls with “1-High,” “2-Structure,” and
“3-Medium” priority levels were identified as emergency calls.
Based on the methodology above, for 4,293 calls (Table 5-1), we excluded 319 canceled calls,
237 mutual aid calls, 105 non-emergency calls, 69 calls where no units recorded a valid on-
scene time, and 60 calls with a total response time exceeding 30 minutes. As a result, in this
section, a total of 3,503 calls are included in the analysis.
232
Response Time by Type of Call
Table 5-15 breaks down the average and 90th percentile dispatch, turnout, travel, and total
response times by call type. A 90th percentile means that 90 percent of calls had response times
at or below that number. For example, Table 5-15 shows an overall 90th percentile response time
of 14.3 minutes, which means that 90 percent of the time, a call had a response time of no more
than 14.3 minutes. Figures 5-8 and 5-9 illustrate the same information.
TABLE 5-15: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by
Call Type
Call Type Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min. Call
Count Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
Breathing difficulty 1.8 1.5 5.3 8.6 3.0 2.6 8.2 11.9 239
Cardiac and stroke 1.9 1.6 5.2 8.8 2.8 2.4 8.2 12.6 299
Fall and injury 2.3 1.6 6.1 9.9 3.6 2.5 9.9 14.4 483
Illness and other 2.7 1.5 5.9 10.0 4.7 2.5 9.6 15.0 1,194
MVA 2.4 1.6 4.8 8.8 4.4 2.6 7.0 12.5 133
OD* 3.3 1.8 6.1 11.2 6.8 2.8 10.3 17.9 111
Seizure and UNC** 2.0 1.4 5.3 8.7 3.3 2.3 8.5 12.4 434
EMS Subtotal 2.4 1.5 5.7 9.6 3.9 2.5 9.2 14.0 2,893
False alarm 1.8 2.0 6.6 10.4 2.6 3.5 9.8 14.0 210
Good intent 2.0 1.8 5.6 9.4 2.9 2.7 9.4 13.5 33
Hazard 2.3 1.8 6.8 11.0 3.9 3.0 10.7 16.5 79
Outside fire 2.0 1.8 6.3 10.2 3.3 3.4 10.5 14.5 23
Public service 2.4 1.9 6.7 11.0 4.0 3.0 11.4 16.9 240
Structure fire 1.8 1.7 5.0 8.5 3.2 3.2 7.2 12.3 25
Fire Subtotal 2.1 1.9 6.5 10.6 3.5 3.2 10.4 15.3 610
Total 2.3 1.6 5.8 9.7 3.9 2.6 9.6 14.3 3,503
Note: *OD= Overdose and psychiatric; **UNC=Unconsciousness.
233
FIGURE 5-8: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type – EMS
FIGURE 5-9: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Call Type – Fire
234
Observations:
■ The average dispatch time was 2.3 minutes.
■ The average turnout time was 1.6 minutes.
■ The average travel time was 5.8 minutes.
■ The average total response time was 9.7 minutes.
■ The average response time was 9.6 minutes for EMS calls and 10.6 minutes for fire calls.
■ The average response time was 10.2 minutes for outside fires and 8.5 minutes for structure fires.
■ The 90th percentile dispatch time was 3.9 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile turnout time was 2.6 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile travel time was 9.6 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile total response time was 14.3 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile response time was 14.0 minutes for EMS calls and 15.3 minutes for fire calls.
■ The 90th percentile response time was 14.5 minutes for outside fires and 12.3 minutes for
structure fires.
235
Response Time by Hour
Table 5-16 shows the average response time by the time of day. The table also shows 90th
percentile response times. Figure 5-10 shows the average response time by the time of day.
TABLE 5-16: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by
Hour of Day
Hour
Minutes Number
of Calls Dispatch Turnout Travel Response
Time
90th Percentile
Response Time
0 2.2 2.3 6.1 10.6 15.9 101
1 2.2 2.2 7.1 11.5 17.4 63
2 2.4 2.7 6.6 11.7 17.8 72
3 2.4 2.4 7.3 12.1 18.4 74
4 1.6 2.4 7.1 11.0 14.6 72
5 2.0 2.2 6.6 10.9 15.0 72
6 1.9 2.1 6.4 10.4 13.7 85
7 2.3 1.5 5.9 9.8 12.8 125
8 2.3 1.5 5.1 9.0 13.4 174
9 2.4 1.4 5.6 9.4 13.8 196
10 2.5 1.6 5.4 9.4 13.2 190
11 2.5 1.6 6.0 10.1 15.9 193
12 2.6 1.4 5.6 9.5 14.6 216
13 2.6 1.4 5.8 9.8 15.2 199
14 2.4 1.4 5.5 9.3 13.8 200
15 2.5 1.2 5.5 9.2 13.4 207
6 2.3 1.3 5.8 9.4 14.5 204
17 2.5 1.4 5.8 9.8 15.2 199
18 2.1 1.5 5.7 9.3 13.6 179
19 1.9 1.6 5.3 8.8 12.4 149
20 2.3 1.4 5.5 9.2 12.8 170
21 2.3 1.4 5.8 9.5 13.9 139
22 2.3 1.8 6.1 10.3 15.3 122
23 1.9 2.0 6.0 9.9 13.7 102
Total 2.3 1.6 5.8 9.7 14.3 3,503
236
FIGURE 5-10: Average Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by Hour of Day
Observations:
■ Average dispatch time was between 1.6 minutes (4:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m.) and 2.6 minutes
(noon to 1:00 p.m.).
■ Average turnout time was between 1.2 minutes (3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.) and 2.7 minutes
(2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m.).
■ Average travel time was between 5.1 minutes (8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and 7.3 minutes
(3:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.).
■ Average response time was between 8.8 minutes (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.) and 12.1 minutes
(3:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.).
■ The 90th percentile response time was between 12.4 minutes (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.) and
18.4 minutes (3:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.).
237
Response Time Distribution
Here, we present a more detailed look at how response times to calls are distributed. The
cumulative distribution of total response time for the first arriving unit to EMS calls is shown in
Figure 5-11 and Table 5-17. Figure 5-11 shows response times for the first arriving unit to EMS calls
as a frequency distribution in whole-minute increments, and Figure 5-12 shows the same for the
first arriving unit to outside and structure fire calls.
The cumulative percentages here are read in the same way as a percentile. In Figure 5-11, the
90th percentile of 14.0 minutes means that 90 percent of EMS calls had a response time of 14.0
minutes or less. In Table 5-17, the cumulative percentage of 37.4, for example, means that
37.4 percent of EMS calls had a response time under 8 minutes.
FIGURE 5-11: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit – EMS
238
FIGURE 5-12: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit –
Outside and Structure Fires
239
TABLE 5-17: Cumulative Distribution of Response Time – First Arriving Unit
Response Time
(minute)
EMS Outside and Structure Fires
Frequency Cumulative
Percentage Frequency Cumulative
Percentage
1 1 0.0 0 0.0
2 2 0.1 0 0.0
3 13 0.6 0 0.0
4 46 2.1 0 0.0
5 109 5.9 4 8.3
6 196 12.7 3 14.6
7 324 23.9 7 29.2
8 392 37.4 8 45.8
9 409 51.6 5 56.2
10 364 64.2 3 62.5
11 272 73.6 5 72.9
12 209 80.8 1 75.0
13 155 86.1 2 79.2
14 112 90.0 5 89.6
15 69 92.4 2 93.8
16 56 94.3 2 97.9
17 31 95.4 0 97.9
18 28 96.4 0 97.9
19 28 97.3 0 97.9
20+ 77 100.0 1 100.0
Observations:
■ For 37 percent of EMS calls, the response time of the first arriving unit was less than 8 minutes.
■ For 46 percent of outside and structure fire calls, the response time of the first arriving unit was
less than 8 minutes.
240
Response Time by Station Area
Here, we detail the average and 90th percentile response times to calls that occurred in
different parts of the KFD’s response area. The results are shown in the following table.
TABLE 5-18: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Unit, by
Area
Area Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min. Call
Count Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
K61-SK 4Corner 3.7 1.6 7.9 13.1 14.0 2.5 13.2 26.3 17
KS61 Commercial 2.6 1.5 5.0 9.1 4.5 2.6 8.5 13.8 1,005
KS61 Residential 2.3 1.6 6.2 10.1 3.8 2.6 10.0 14.8 1,249
Station 61 Subtotal 2.4 1.6 5.7 9.7 4.0 2.6 9.4 14.4 2,271
KS62 Commercial 2.2 1.6 5.3 9.1 3.7 2.6 8.2 13.2 559
KS62 Residential 2.1 1.7 6.7 10.5 3.4 2.7 10.5 14.6 673
Station 62 Subtotal 2.2 1.6 6.1 9.9 3.4 2.7 9.8 14.0 1,232
Total 2.3 1.6 5.8 9.7 3.9 2.6 9.6 14.3 3,503
241
TRANSPORT CALL ANALYSIS
In this section, we present an analysis of KFD unit activity that involved transporting patients, the
variations by hour of day, and the average time for each stage of transport service. We
identified transport calls by requiring that at least one responding medic unit had recorded both
“en route to hospital” and “at hospital” times. Based on these criteria, note that 106 non-EMS
calls resulted in a transport and are included in this analysis.
Transport Calls by Type
The following table shows the number of calls by call type broken out by transport and non-
transport calls.
TABLE 5-19: Transport Calls by Call Type
Call Type Number of Calls Conversion
Rate Non-transport Transport Total
Breathing difficulty 63 181 244 74.2
Cardiac and stroke 88 216 304 71.1
Fall and injury 178 324 502 64.5
Illness and other 455 821 1,276 64.3
MVA 134 30 164 18.3
Overdose and psychiatric 35 86 121 71.1
Seizure and unconsciousness 178 278 456 61.0
EMS Subtotal 1,131 1,936 3,067 63.1
Fire & Other 1,120 106 1,226 8.6
Total 2,251 2,042 4,293 47.6
Observations:
■ Overall, 63 percent of EMS calls in Kalispell involved transporting one or more patients.
■ On average, there were 8.4 EMS calls per day, and 5.3 involved transporting one or more
patients.
■ Breathing difficulty calls had the highest transport rate, averaging 74 percent.
■ Motor vehicle accidents had the lowest transport rate, averaging 18 percent.
242
Average Transport Calls per Hour
Table 5-20 and Figure 5-13 show the average number of EMS calls received each hour of the
day for the year and the average number of transport calls. Transport calls categorized as fire,
mutual aid, or canceled have been excluded from the table.
TABLE 5-20: Transport Calls per Day, by Hour
Hour
Number of
EMS Calls
Number of
Transport Calls
EMS Calls
per Day
Transport
Calls per Day
Conversion
Rate
0 89 62 0.2 0.2 69.7
1 54 32 0.1 0.1 59.3
2 56 33 0.2 0.1 58.9
3 56 35 0.2 0.1 62.5
4 60 46 0.2 0.1 76.7
5 66 47 0.2 0.1 71.2
6 66 44 0.2 0.1 66.7
7 98 68 0.3 0.2 69.4
8 164 113 0.4 0.3 68.9
9 163 117 0.4 0.3 71.8
10 163 108 0.4 0.3 66.3
11 160 95 0.4 0.3 59.4
12 198 126 0.5 0.3 63.6
13 174 99 0.5 0.3 56.9
14 186 115 0.5 0.3 61.8
15 186 109 0.5 0.3 58.6
16 179 108 0.5 0.3 60.3
17 172 106 0.5 0.3 61.6
18 157 106 0.4 0.3 67.5
19 138 82 0.4 0.2 59.4
20 157 98 0.4 0.3 62.4
21 124 74 0.3 0.2 59.7
22 106 61 0.3 0.2 57.5
23 95 52 0.3 0.1 54.7
Total 3,067 1,936 8.4 5.3 63.1
243
FIGURE 5-13: Average Transport Calls per Day, by Hour
Observations:
■ Hourly EMS calls per day were highest during the day from noon to 6:00 p.m., averaging
0.5 calls per hour.
■ Average hourly EMS calls per day peaked between noon and 1:00 p.m., averaging 0.54 calls
per hour.
■ Average hourly EMS calls per day were lowest between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m., averaging
0.15 calls per hour.
■ Hourly transport calls per day were highest during the day from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,
averaging 0.3 calls per hour.
■ Average hourly transport calls per day peaked between noon and 1:00 p.m., averaging
0.35 calls per hour.
■ Average hourly transport calls per day was lowest between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m.,
averaging 0.09 calls per hour.
■ Average hourly transport conversion rates per day peaked between 4:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.,
averaging 77 percent.
■ Average hourly transport conversion rates per day were lowest between 11:00 p.m. and
midnight, averaging 55 percent.
244
Calls by Type and Duration
The following table shows the average duration of transport and non-transport EMS calls by call
type.
TABLE 5-21: Transport Call Duration by Call Type
Call Type
Non-transport Transport
Average
Duration,
Min.
Number of
Calls
Average
Duration,
Min.
Number of
Calls
Breathing difficulty 26.2 63 48.6 181
Cardiac and stroke 25.6 88 48.6 216
Fall and injury 24.7 178 48.0 324
Illness and other 23.4 455 47.8 821
MVA 29.1 134 59.4 30
Overdose and psychiatric 24.3 35 46.5 86
Seizure and unconsciousness 23.6 178 49.8 278
EMS Subtotal 24.7 1,131 48.4 1,936
Fire & Other 21.3 1,120 59.5 106
Total 23.0 2,251 49.0 2,042
Note: The duration of a call is defined as the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call.
Observations:
■ The average duration was 24.7 minutes for non-transport EMS calls.
■ The average duration was 48.4 minutes for EMS calls where one or more patients were
transported to a hospital.
245
Transport Time Components
The following table shows the average deployed time for a transport-capable unit on a transport
call, along with three major components of the deployed time: on-scene time, travel to hospital
time, and at-hospital time.
The on-scene time is the interval from the unit arriving on-scene time through the time the unit
departs the scene for the hospital. Travel to hospital time is the interval from the time the unit
departs the scene to travel to the hospital through the time the unit arrives at the hospital. At-
hospital time is the interval from the time the unit arrives at the hospital until the unit is cleared.
The table analyzes times by run. Normally, the number of runs (2,044) exceeds the number of
calls (2,042) as a call may have multiple units assigned (a run for each unit to a single call). In
addition, average times may differ slightly from similar averages measured per call.
TABLE 5-22: Time Component Analysis for Ambulance Transport Runs by Call
Type
Call Type
Average Time Spent per Run, Minutes Number
of Runs On
Scene
Traveling to
Hospital
At
Hospital Deployed
Breathing difficulty 14.1 7.0 19.0 48.4 181
Cardiac and stroke 14.5 6.8 19.4 48.2 216
Fall and injury 15.7 6.1 17.8 47.7 324
Illness and other 13.6 6.7 19.1 47.5 821
MVA 15.5 8.0 21.1 51.1 32
Overdose and psychiatric 14.2 6.5 16.6 45.7 86
Seizure and unconsciousness 16.3 6.7 18.5 49.6 278
EMS Total 14.6 6.7 18.7 48.0 1,938
Fire & Other Total 16.4 11.3 20.7 59.5 106
Total 14.7 6.9 18.8 48.6 2,044
Note: Average unit deployed time per run is lower than the average call duration for some call types because call
duration is based on the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call, which may include an engine or ladder. Total deployed time is greater than the combination of on-scene, transport, and hospital wait times as it includes turnout, initial travel, and hospital return times.
Observations:
■ The average time spent on-scene for a transport EMS call was 14.6 minutes.
■ The average travel time from the scene of the EMS call to the hospital was 6.7 minutes.
■ The average deployed time spent on an EMS transport was 48.0 minutes.
■ The average deployed time at the hospital was 18.7 minutes, which accounts for
approximately 39 percent of the average total deployed time for a transport EMS call.
246
ATTACHMENT I: ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
TABLE 5-23: Workload of Administrative Units
Unit ID Unit Type Annual Hours Annual
Runs
601 Fire Chief 26.5 31
602 Assistant Chief 17.1 30
Total 43.6 61
247
ATTACHMENT II: ACTIONS TAKEN
TABLE 5-24: Actions Taken Analysis for Structure and Outside Fire Calls
Action Taken Number of Calls
Outside Fire Structure Fire
Confine fire (wildland) 2 0
Contain fire (wildland) 3 0
Control fire (wildland) 2 0
Control traffic 2 0
Enforce codes 2 0
Extinguishment by fire service personnel 15 9
Fire control or extinguishment, other 2 11
Incident command 1 4
Information, investigation & enforcement, other 0 1
Investigate 11 9
Operate apparatus or vehicle 3 0
Provide information to public or media 1 0
Remove hazard 1 0
Restore fire alarm system 1 0
Salvage & overhaul 1 7
Shut down system 0 3
Ventilate 0 6
Note: Totals are higher than the total number of structure and outside fire calls because some calls recorded multiple
actions taken.
Observations:
■ Out of 25 outside fires, 15 were extinguished by fire service personnel, which accounted for
60 percent of outside fires.
■ Out of 26 structure fires, 9 were extinguished by fire service personnel, which accounted for
35 percent of structure fires.
248
ATTACHMENT III: FIRE LOSS
TABLE 5-25: Total Fire Loss Above and Below $25,000
Call Type No Loss Under $25,000 $25,000 plus Total
Outside fire 22 2 1 25
Structure fire 19 5 2 26
Total 41 7 3 51
TABLE 5-26: Content and Property Loss – Structure and Outside Fires
Call Type Property Loss Content Loss
Loss Value Number of Calls Loss Value Number of Calls
Outside fire $35,200 3 $2,000 1
Structure fire $112,050 7 $60,120 5
Total $147,250 10 $62,120 6
Note: The table includes only fire calls with a recorded loss greater than 0.
Observations:
■ 22 outside fires and 19 structure fires had no recorded losses.
■ One outside fire and two structure fires had $25,000 or more in recorded losses.
■ Structure fires:
□ The highest total loss for a structure fire was $105,000.
□ The average total loss for all structure fires was $6,622.
□ Five structure fires recorded content losses with a combined $60,120 in losses.
□ Out of 26 structure fires, seven had recorded property losses, with a combined $112,050 in
losses.
■ Outside fires:
□ The highest total loss for an outside fire was $32,000.
□ The average total loss for all outside fires was $1,488.
□ One outside fire recorded content loss with a combined $2,000 in losses.
□ Out of 25 outside fires, three had recorded property losses, with a combined $35,200 in
losses.
249
ATTACHMENT IV: HISTORICAL TRENDS IN SERVICE
In this section, we present an analysis of historical trends in EMS and fire responses based on five
years of data for the KFD. The trends in calls by type, unit workload, response time, and transport
call volume are analyzed.
Trend in Calls by Type
Table 5-27 and Figure 5-14 show the trend in the number of calls by type from 2018 through 2022.
TABLE 5-27: Calls by Type and Year
Year EMS Fire Other Total
2018 2,567 506 404 3,477
2019 2,502 586 468 3,556
2020 2,561 688 477 3,726
2021 2,966 666 504 4,136
2022 3,067 670 556 4,293
Note: For each year, we excluded testing calls, calls without enroute and arriving units, and calls responded to by only administrative units.
FIGURE 5-14: Calls by Type and Year
Observations:
■ Overall call volume increased 23 percent from 3,477 in 2018 to 4,293 in 2022.
■ EMS calls increased 19 percent from 2,567 in 2018 to 3,067 in 2022.
250
■ Fire calls increased 32 percent from 506 in 2018 to 670 in 2022.
■ Other calls (canceled and mutual aid combined) increased 38 percent from 404 in 2018 to
556 in 2022.
251
Trend in Workload
Table 5-28 shows the trend in workload for KFD units responding to calls from 2018 through 2022.
The workload is measured in both the number of runs and the annual deployed hours. As with
calls, these are separated by EMS, fire, and other call types. Figures 5-15 and 5-16 illustrate the
trend in runs and annual deployed hours, respectively. Figure 5-17 presents the trend of average
deployed minutes by the hour of the day by year.
TABLE 5-28: Runs and Deployed Hours by Type and Year
Year Runs Deployed Hours
EMS Fire Other Total EMS Fire Other Total
2018 3,454 680 473 4,607 2,048.3 290.4 209.4 2,548.1
2019 3,421 760 546 4,727 2,092.7 362.6 222.5 2,677.8
2020 3,620 864 571 5,055 2,081.9 345.0 206.6 2,633.5
2021 4,215 820 611 5,646 2,349.5 305.3 208.4 2,863.2
2022 4,461 782 665 5,908 2,463.9 320.3 250.0 3,034.2
252
FIGURE 5-15: Runs by Type and Year
FIGURE 5-16: Deployed Hours by Type and Year
253
FIGURE 5-17: Average Deployed Minutes by Hour of Day and Year
Observations:
■ Total runs increased 28 percent from 4,607 in 2018 to 5,908 in 2022.
■ EMS runs increased 29 percent from 3,454 in 2018 to 4,461 in 2022.
■ Fire runs increased 15 percent from 680 in 2018 to 782 in 2022.
■ The total workload increased 19 percent from 2,548.1 hours in 2018 to 3,034.2 hours in 2022.
■ The EMS workload increased 20 percent from 2,048.3 hours in 2018 to 2,463.9 hours in 2022.
■ The fire workload increased 10 percent from 290.4 hours in 2018 to 320.3 hours in 2022.
254
Trend in Response Time
For the five-year data, we chose calls for the response time analysis based on the methodology
introduced in the Response Time section. For the first arriving KFD units responding to calls, the
trends in average and 90th percentile dispatch, turnout, travel, and total response times by call
type are examined in Tables 5-29 and 5-30, respectively. Figure 5-18 shows the average response
time by year and Figure 5-19 shows the average response time of the first arriving unit by hour of
day by year.
TABLE 5-29: Average Response Time by Year (in Minutes)
Year Dispatch Turnout Travel Response Time Call
Count EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total
2018 2.5 2.1 2.4 1.9 2.3 1.9 5.1 4.7 5.0 9.4 9.0 9.3 2,672
2019 2.2 1.9 2.2 1.7 2.1 1.8 5.4 5.0 5.3 9.2 9.1 9.2 2,922
2020 2.4 2.1 2.3 1.7 1.9 1.7 5.4 5.6 5.4 9.4 9.6 9.5 3,074
2021 2.6 2.3 2.5 1.5 1.8 1.6 5.6 5.9 5.7 9.7 10.0 9.8 3,447
2022 2.4 2.1 2.3 1.5 1.9 1.6 5.7 6.5 5.8 9.6 10.6 9.7 3,503
TABLE 5-30: 90th Percentile Response Time by Year (in Minutes)
Year Dispatch Turnout Travel Response Time Call
Count EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total EMS Fire Total
2018 4.3 3.5 4.2 3.0 3.4 3.0 8.8 8.5 8.8 14.3 13.5 14.2 2,672
2019 3.7 3.2 3.6 2.7 3.4 2.9 9.0 8.6 8.9 13.6 13.4 13.6 2,922
2020 4.0 3.6 3.8 2.8 2.9 2.8 9.0 9.8 9.2 13.8 14.7 14.0 3,074
2021 4.4 3.9 4.3 2.6 2.9 2.6 9.2 9.9 9.3 14.4 14.9 14.5 3,447
2022 3.9 3.5 3.9 2.5 3.2 2,6 9.2 10.4 9.6 14.0 15.3 14.3 3,503
255
FIGURE 5-18: Average Response Time by Year
FIGURE 5-19: Average Response Time by Hour of Day, by Year
256
Observations:
■ The average response time for EMS calls ranged from 9.2 to 9.7 minutes between 2018 and
2022 and showed no specific trend.
■ The 90th percentile response time for EMS calls ranged from 13.6 to 14.4 minutes between
2018 and 2022 and showed no specific trend.
■ The average response time for fire calls increased 18 percent from 9.0 minutes in 2018 to
10.6 minutes in 2022.
■ The 90th percentile response time for fire calls increased 13 percent from 13.5 minutes in
2018 to 15.3 minutes in 2022.
257
Trend in Transport Calls
Table 5-31 and Figure 5-20 show the trend in the volume of different types of transport calls from
2018 through 2022.
TABLE 5-31: Transport Call Volume by Type and Year
Year EMS Fire & Other Total
2018 1,494 112 1,606
2019 1,598 113 1,711
2020 1,557 91 1,648
2021 1,807 74 1,881
2022 1,936 106 2,042
FIGURE 5-20: Transport Calls by Type and Year
Observations:
■ The volume of transport calls increased 27 percent from 1,606 in 2018 to 2,042 in 2022.
258
ATTACHMENT V: LOGAN HEALTH AMBULANCE
Between June 2, 2022, and December 31, 2022, Logan Health ambulances 2821 and 2822 went
en route or arrived at 490 calls, of which 291 were 9-1-1 emergency and 199 were interfacility
transfer calls. Of the interfacility transfer calls 164 lacked records of transporting and at hospital
times. Out of 291 9-1-1 emergency calls, Logan Health ambulances arrived at 283 calls
(97 percent) and transported one or more patients in 231 calls (82 percent).
Logan Health Ambulance Calls
Table 5-32 shows the number of calls by call type and the percentage of calls that fall into each
call type category for the six months studied. Figure 5-21 shows the monthly variation in the
number of calls handled by the Logan Health ambulances between June 2, 2022, and
December 31, 2022. Similarly, Figure 5-22 illustrates the number of calls received by hour over the
same period.
TABLE 5-32: Call Responded to by Logan Health, by Type
Call Type Total
Calls
Call
Percentage
Assist agency 4 0.8
Breathing difficulty 24 4.9
Cardiac and stroke 25 5.1
Fall and injury 43 8.8
Illness and other 147 30.0
Interfacility transfer 199 40.6
MVA 7 1.4
Overdose and psychiatric 7 1.4
Seizure and unconsciousness 34 6.9
Total 490 100.0
Observations:
■ Logan Health ambulances responded to 490 calls, including four agency assist calls.
■ Interfacility transfer calls totaled 199 (41 percent of EMS calls).
259
Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Month and Hour of Day
FIGURE 5-21: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Month
FIGURE 5-22: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Hour of Day
260
Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Type and Duration
Table 5-33 shows the duration of calls by type using four duration categories: less than 30
minutes, 30 minutes to one hour, one to two hours, and more than two hours.
TABLE 5-33: Logan Health Ambulance Calls by Type and Duration
Call Type Less than
30 Minutes
30 Minutes
to One Hour
One to Two
Hours
Two or More
Hours Total
Assist agency 3 1 0 0 4
Breathing difficulty 2 17 3 2 24
Cardiac and stroke 2 19 4 0 25
Fall and injury 8 25 9 1 43
Illness and other 19 106 17 5 147
Interfacility transfer 2 35 91 71 199
MVA 5 2 0 0 7
Overdose and psychiatric 1 6 0 0 7
Seizure and unconsciousness 3 24 7 0 34
Total 45 235 131 79 490
Observations:
■ A total of 280 calls (57 percent) lasted less than one hour, 131 calls (27 percent) lasted one to
two hours, and 79 calls (16 percent) lasted two or more hours.
261
Logan Health Ambulance Runs and Deployed Time
Table 5-34 shows the total deployed time, both overall and broken down by type of run, for
ambulances 2821 and 2822 between June 2, 2022, and December 31, 2022. Table 5-35
summarizes the annual workload of ambulances 2821 and 2822.
TABLE 5-34: Logan Health Runs and Deployed Time by Type
Run Type Minutes
per Run Hours Percent
of Hours Runs
Agency assist 12.2 1.4 0.2 7
Breathing difficulty 55.3 22.1 2.9 24
Cardiac and stroke 47.8 19.9 2.6 25
Fall and injury 54.4 39.0 5.0 43
Illness and other 49.9 124.8 16.2 150
Interfacility transfer 158.3 527.7 68.3 200
MVA 22.1 2.6 0.3 7
Overdose and psychiatric 34.0 4.0 0.5 7
Seizure and unconsciousness 54.0 30.6 4.0 34
Total 93.2 772.1 100.0 497
TABLE 5-35: Logan Health Ambulance Workload
Ambulance Minutes
per Run Hours Total
Percent Runs
2821 82.7 510.2 66.1 370
2822 123.8 261.9 33.9 127
Total 93.2 772.1 100.0 497
Observations:
■ The total deployed time for the year was 772.1 hours.
■ There were 497 runs.
■ The average deployed time per run was 93.2 minutes.
262
Logan Health Ambulance Workload by Fire District
Table 5-36 breaks down the workload of Logan Health by the fire district or first due station where
the calls occurred.
TABLE 5-36: Annual Workload of Logan Health by District
District / Station Area Calls Percent
Calls Runs Minutes
Per Run
Work
Hours
Percent
Work
KFD Station 61 2 0.4 2 42.9 1.4 0.2
KFD Station 62 394 80.4 401 87.8 587.0 76.0
Glacier Park Intl Airport 9 1.8 9 119.9 18.0 2.3
Evergreen FD (MID) 5 1.0 5 236.1 19.7 2.5
Marion FD (West) 3 0.6 3 219.8 11.0 1.4
Olney FD 1 0.2 1 1.6 0.0 0.0
Whitefish FD 76 15.5 76 106.6 135.0 17.5
Total 490 100.0 497 93.2 772.1 100.0
Logan Health Ambulance Response Time by Type of Call
In this analysis, we excluded 199 interfacility transfer calls, four agency assist calls, eight calls
where no units recorded a valid on-scene time, six calls with a total response time exceeding
30 minutes, and 40 calls where one or more segments of the first arriving unit’s response time
could not be calculated due to missing or faulty data. As a result, in this section, a total of 233
calls are included in the analysis.
Table 5-37 breaks down the average and 90th percentile dispatch, turnout, travel, and total
response times by call type. Figure 5-23 illustrates the average response time for each type of
EMS call.
TABLE 5-37: Average and 90th Percentile Response Time of First Arriving Logan
Health Ambulance, by Call Type
Call Type Average Response Time, Min. 90th Percentile Response Time, Min. Call
Count Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Dispatch Turnout Travel Total
Breathing difficulty 2.1 3.2 3.4 8.7 3.3 5.6 5.2 11.2 19
Cardiac and stroke 2.0 3.0 4.1 9.1 4.6 5.2 8.9 16.7 19
Fall and injury 2.6 3.2 3.6 9.4 5.9 5.4 5.2 13.8 36
Illness and other 2.4 3.4 3.1 8.9 3.8 5.5 5.1 11.2 120
MVA 2.1 2.8 3.8 8.8 5.4 4.9 5.1 11.3 5
OD* 3.0 2.5 3.1 8.6 5.5 6.0 4.2 11.2 6
Seizure and UNC** 2.0 2.9 3.4 8.3 3.4 6.3 5.5 10.4 28
Total 2.3 3.2 3.3 8.9 3.9 5.4 5.2 11.4 233
Note: *OD= Overdose and psychiatric; **UNC=Unconsciousness.
263
FIGURE 5-23: Average Response Time of First Arriving Logan Health Ambulance,
by Call Type
Observations:
■ The average dispatch time was 2.3 minutes.
■ The average turnout time was 3.2 minutes.
■ The average travel time was 3.3 minutes.
■ The average total response time was 8.9 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile dispatch time was 3.9 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile turnout time was 5.4 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile travel time was 5.2 minutes.
■ The 90th percentile total response time was 11.4 minutes.
264
Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Type
Due to the incomplete time stamps of unit status in interfacility transport data, the 199
interfacility transfer calls were not included in the transport analysis for Logan Health. Table 5-38
shows the number of 9-1-1 calls by call type broken out by transport and non-transport calls.
Figure 5-24 shows the number of 9-1-1 EMS and transport calls received each hour.
TABLE 5-38: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Call Type
Call Type Number of Calls Conversion
Rate Non-transport Transport Total
Agency assist 1 3 4 75.0
Breathing difficulty 7 17 24 70.8
Cardiac and stroke 4 21 25 84.0
Fall and injury 10 33 43 76.7
Illness and other 27 120 147 81.6
MVA 5 2 7 28.6
Overdose and psychiatric 1 6 7 85.7
Seizure and unconsciousness 5 29 34 85.3
Total 60 231 291 79.4
FIGURE 5-24: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Calls by Hour
265
Table 5-39 shows the average duration of transport and non-transport EMS calls by call type.
Table 5-40 gives the average deployed time for an ambulance on a transport call, along with
three major components of the deployed time: on-scene time, travel to hospital time, and at-
hospital time. Table 40 analyzes times by run. Normally, the number of runs (234) exceeds the
number of calls (231) as a call may have multiple runs. In addition, average times may differ
slightly from similar averages measured per call.
TABLE 5-39: Logan Health Ambulance Transport Call Duration by Call Type
Call Type
Non-transport Transport
Average
Duration
Number of
Calls
Average
Duration
Number of
Calls
Agency assist 1.6 1 24.1 3
Breathing difficulty 54.9 7 55.5 17
Cardiac and stroke 50.8 4 47.3 21
Fall and injury 42.7 10 57.9 33
Illness and other 39.5 27 53.3 120
MVA 14.6 5 40.6 2
Overdose and psychiatric 33.1 1 34.2 6
Seizure and unconsciousness 39.0 5 56.5 29
Total 39.7 60 53.0 231
Note: The duration of a call is defined as the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call.
TABLE 5-40: Time Component for Logan Health Ambulance Transport Runs by
Type
Call Type
Average Time Spent per Run, Minutes Number
of Runs On Scene Traveling to
Hospital At Hospital Deployed
Agency assist 2.7 0.1 8.0 13.7 5
Breathing difficulty 23.5 2.8 22.8 55.5 17
Cardiac and stroke 21.9 5.6 13.3 47.3 21
Fall and injury 23.7 3.0 23.4 57.9 33
Illness and other 20.9 3.6 21.6 53.0 121
MVA 26.0 2.0 10.2 40.6 2
Overdose and psychiatric 18.2 1.1 9.7 34.2 6
Seizure and unconsciousness 23.8 3.3 22.6 56.5 29
Total 21.5 3.5 20.6 52.4 234
Note: Average unit deployed time per run is lower than the average call duration for some call types because call
duration is based on the longest deployed time of any of the units responding to the same call.
266
ATTACHMENT V: CALL TYPE IDENTIFICATION
When available, NFIRS data serves as our primary source for assigning call categories. For
calendar year 2022, 1,148 of the 4,056 calls inside KFD Station 61 and 62’s jurisdictions, NFIRS
incident type codes were used to assign call types for canceled, fire, and motor vehicle
accident (MVA) calls (Table 5-41). For 2,908 EMS calls that do not have NFIRS incident types, we
instead used their Criteria Based Dispatch (CBD) codes in the CAD data to assign call categories
(Table 5-42). The 237 mutual aid calls were not included.
TABLE 5-41: Call Type by NFIRS Incident Type Code and Description
Call Type Code Description Call
Count
Canceled
611 Dispatched and canceled en route 210
621 Wrong location 1
622 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 108
False
Alarm
700 False alarm or false call, other 29
710 Malicious, mischievous false alarm, other 2
711 Municipal alarm system, malicious false alarm 3
714 Central station, malicious false alarm 2
715 Local alarm system, malicious false alarm 2
730 System or detector malfunction, other 3
731 Sprinkler activated due to the failure or malfunction 4
732 Extinguishing system activation due to malfunction 1
733 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 14
735 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 19
736 CO detector activation due to malfunction 8
740 Unintentional transmission of alarm, other 7
741 Sprinkler activation, no fire - unintentional 4
743 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 16
744 Detector activation, no fire - unintentional 3
745 Alarm system activation (no fire) - unintentional 92
746 Carbon monoxide detector activation (no CO) 8
Good
Intent
600 Good intent call, other 16
631 Authorized controlled burning 3
650 Steam, other gas mistaken for smoke, other 1
651 Smoke scare, odor of smoke, not steam 19
652 Steam, vapor, fog, or dust thought to be smoke 1
653 Smoke from barbecue or tar kettle (no hostile fire) 1
661
EMS call where injured party has been transported
by a non-fire service agency or left the scene prior to
arrival
1
671 Hazardous material release investigation 2
267
Call Type Code Description Call
Count
Hazard
400 Hazardous condition (no fire), other 1
411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 3
412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 46
422 Chemical spill or leak 2
424 Carbon monoxide incident 11
440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 1
442 Overheated motor or wiring 2
444 Power line down 15
445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 14
Motor
Vehicle
Accident
322 Motor vehicle accident with injuries 42
323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident 6
324 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries 111
Outside
Fire
131 Passenger vehicle fire 6
140 Natural vegetation fire, other 4
141 Forest, woods, or wildland fire 1
142 Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire 1
143 Grass fire 2
150 Outside rubbish fire, other 1
151 Outside rubbish, trash, or waste fire 4
154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire 1
160 Special outside fire, other 4
172 Cultivated orchard or vineyard fire 1
Public
Service
353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 2
381 Rescue or EMS standby for hazardous conditions 1
500 Service call, other 12
520 Water problem, other 2
522 Water or steam leak 6
531 Smoke or odor removal 4
550 Public service assistance, other 35
551 Assist police or another governmental agency 4
552 Police matter 8
553 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 37
554 Assist invalid 136
561 Unauthorized burning 15
911 Citizen’s complaint 1
268
Call Type Code NFIRS Incident Type Description Call
Count
Structure
Fire
100 Fire, other 2
111 Building fire 9
112 Fire in structure, other than in a building 1
113 Cooking fire 7
114 Chimney or flue fire 1
118 Trash or rubbish fire in a structure 4
122 Fire in a motor home, camper, or recreational
vehicle when used as a structure 2
Total 1,148
TABLE 5-42: Call Type by Emergency Medical Dispatch Code and Description
Call Type Code Description Calls
Breathing Difficulty 05 Breathing difficulty 237
08 Choking 7
Cardiac and Stroke
06 Cardiac arrest 14
07 Chest pain/discomfort/heart problem 219
18 Stroke 71
Fall and Injury
21 Assault/trauma 483
23 Drowning/diving or water-related injury 1
24 Falls/accident/pain 18
Illness and Other
02 Anaphylaxis/allergic reaction 12
04 Bleeding – non-traumatic 262
09 Diabetic 56
10 Environmental/toxic exposure 15
12 Head/neck 3
15 Pregnancy/childbirth/gyn 6
17 Sick (unknown/other) 163
20 Pediatric emergencies 11
NA Other with NFIRS 320 and 321 codes 748
Motor Vehicle Accident 25 MVA 5
Overdose and
Psychiatric
13 Mental/emotional/psychological 50
14 Overdose/poisoning 71
Seizure And
Unconsciousness
16 Seizures 110
19 Unconscious/unresponsive/syncope 346
Total 2,908
- END -