Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Davidson County to seek outside EMS review as response‑time and staffing concerns persist
Summary
County staff and commissioners agreed to pursue an outside consultant to analyze EMS response times, base placement and operational options after staff cited staffing shortfalls, hospital pull on medics and data discrepancies between local CAD outputs and earlier consultant work.
Davidson County commissioners agreed Feb. 5 to move forward with an outside review of the county’s emergency medical services, following a staff presentation that flagged staffing shortages and data questions about response times.
County staff presented a recent proposal from a vendor to analyze CAD (computer‑aided dispatch) data and recommend potential changes to base placement, ‘chaser’ or quick‑response vehicle deployment, and other operational adjustments. Mr. Smith, who presented the briefing, said the county has CAD data but needs an apples‑to‑apples CAD analysis from a consultant so the county can compare methodologies, base locations and travel‑time components with other jurisdictions.
Why it matters: Commissioners heard that hospitals and private convalescent providers have taken increasingly large shares of medic labor or call volume in other counties, creating regional competition for certified medics. Mr. Smith told the board that response time breaks into dispatch, on‑scene and travel components and that a consultant with CAD expertise could identify whether delays stem from dispatch processes, ambulance staging or travel distances in the county’s 570‑square‑mile service area.
What staff said: Mr. Smith said staff had run CAD extracts with help from Jonathan Todd in the sheriff’s office and that earlier consultant work (cited examples from Forsyth and Davie counties) produced broadly similar timing but different conclusions when the travel piece was isolated. “We have that data out of CAD,” he said, noting the county wants a consultant who will run the county’s SQL‑based CAD through a comparable methodology to confirm findings.
Board action and next steps: Commissioners signaled consensus to place the consultant recommendation on an upcoming agenda for formal action. Board members praised the analysis as a reasonable next step and said they wanted the consultant to examine three priorities Mr. Smith identified: base placement, where to position chasers/QRVs, and options to partner with or incentivize convalescent providers for Basic Life Support (BLS) calls. The board did not vote on a contract at the Feb. 5 meeting; staff will return with a formal procurement item for the next commission meeting.
