Monday, March 7, 2011

Last Years Town Board Resolution

I posted this at Finding Ulysses, but I ought to have this important resolution here too. It's amazing how the EMS Task Force continues to press ahead towards privatization in spite of this resolution from the town.


Town of Ulysses – Resolution

Whereas, the Ulysses Town Board is concerned that the proposed changes to the Village of Trumansburg’s EMS program are being implemented in a manner with little serious consideration of input from the Town of Ulysses or it’s residents, and

Whereas, the Ulysses Town Board believes that the proposed insurance – only billing plan has not been well enough considered in some aspects that can have serious consequences for equity and ensuring that no one in our community might refuse care or emergency services for fear of the costs, and

Whereas, the community has had little to no input on options to receive EMS that may be more economical or provided in a faster manner, and

Whereas, the Ulysses Town Board also believes that calling the current proposal “insurance only” is deceptive, and the task force process is not open and transparent with minutes taken and made available to the public.

Therefore, be it resolved that the Ulysses Town Board is not in support of the proposed changes to the Trumansburg EMS under the current process.

6/23/2010


Saturday, January 29, 2011

"Insurance Only" is Illegal

Here are links to the memos from the attorney for the Town of Ulysses when she responded to a request from the Supervisor for opinions on the legality of options being considered by the Trumansburg Village Board, to begin a fee for service EMS




Saturday, June 19, 2010

Supervisor elect Marino's 12/14/09 Letter to VB

December 14, 2009

Dear Mayor Petrovic and Trustees Hrubos, Hart, Nottke, and Thomas:

We the undersigned members of the Ulysses Town Board as will be constituted on January 1, 2010 respectfully request that the decision on EMS billing be postponed. We as members of the Town Board who will have the responsibility to contract for EMS services for Ulysses, want to work with the Village Board on this issue. We need to understand more fully what the consequences and details of the proposed plan mean for Town residents in terms of cost savings, service, and fairness. As such, we oppose the Village moving forward at this time with the insurance-only billing plan as currently outlined, with the level of detail provided to us.

As elected officials, we all want to reduce costs to taxpayers while maintaining services. We understand that billing offers the opportunity to generate revenue to help control the escalating costs of maintaining the current ambulance EMS if volunteer numbers continue to decrease and need to be replaced by paid staff. The argument for recovering some of the money our residents pay to health insurance companies to help lower taxes is a compelling one.

But if as a community we continue to support ambulance service with taxpayer dollars, we believe it is important to do everything we can to ensure that everyone, irrespective of their financial resources will not hesitate to call 911 if they or a loved one need an ambulance. This was a major concern voiced by many at the public meeting on the billing option last year. We are concerned that the insurance-only billing plan as presented to the public on November 12, 2009 has not been well enough considered in some aspects that can have serious consequences for equity and ensuring that no one in our community might refuse care or emergency services for fear of the costs. Your response at the November meeting to questions such as how high deductibles will be handled was that these sort of issues are details, not important to be worked out until after the decision to move to billing is made. We are not comfortable with this approach.

Many of our residents who are self employed or work for small businesses by necessity have health insurance with a high deductible that has to be met before benefits are paid. These residents could end up paying several hundred dollars for an ambulance, while others pay little or nothing, depending on their insurance coverage and how the Village chooses to handle collection of the bill. This is not a small detail in the policy, as it impacts sectors of the population very differently.

Another concern is that the support for this major change in policy that impacts so many people is not very strong. The Ulysses Town board voted 3 to 2 in favor of support for billing, with those opposed concerned there was not enough information on all aspects of the issue. Both incoming members of the Town Board are opposed to moving to billing with the currently proposed plan. The Fire Department vote on December 2 was also closely split, with a small majority (53%) in favor the billing process and 47% opposed. Concerns were raised about both the legality of insurance-only billing and the reaction of people in need to taking help when responders cannot assure them that there is no cost. The internal conflict created within the Fire Company between those that favor vs. those that oppose is cause for concern.

The Village should not go forward with a change in policy that has such large ramifications without trying to achieve better consensus among those responsible in some way for implementing it. Why rush at this time to put this plan into place without answers to all of the questions and all of the options fully explored? This issue will impact the residents of our area for many years to come. Shrinking resources and increasing expenses make it necessary to consider the costs and benefits of a change in our current 100% taxpayer-funded EMS, but our Boards can certainly afford to take a little more time to be sure we make a policy decision that serves the greatest good for the most residents.

The new Ulysses Town Board looks forward to working with the Village on this difficult issue as well as the other challenges that face our community in these times of economic uncertainty. The taxpayers expect and deserve a commitment to inter-municipal cooperation from all of us.

Sincerely,

Roxanne Marino (Supervisor-Elect)

Lucia Tyler (Councilperson)

Kevin Romer (Councilperson-Elect)

David Kerness (Councilperson)

Chris Thomas's 12/14/09 Resolution

(this was passed right after getting the above letter from Supervisor elect Roxanne Marino)

Resolution to Create a Municipally Controlled

Fee-for-Service EMS Company.

The following resolution was offered by Trustee Thomas, who moved its adoption, seconded by Trustee Hart, to‑wit:

Whereas, an increase in EMS paid personnel, escalating costs of EMS service, and historic financial uncertainty has caused the Village of Trumansburg to seek methods to reduce the tax burden for EMS ambulance service;

Whereas, fee-for-service has been identified as a viable and legal solution, as researched and determined by Village attorneys, to these escalating costs;

Whereas, the Village of Trumansburg has investigated various options that minimize cost and maximize provision and quality of service and has determined that a municipally controlled fee-for-service EMS ambulance service is in the best interest of the citizens and residents of the Trumansburg Fire District;

Whereas, such a system will require that current EMS ambulance services be legally separated from the Trumansburg Fire Department such that a new nonprofit company will be formed for the purposes of providing EMS ambulance services to the Trumansburg Fire District;

Whereas, a newly established EMS ambulance service will continue to reside in and operate from its existing location within the Trumansburg Fire Department;

Whereas, a fee-for-service EMS ambulance service will take the form of an insurance only service for the purposes of protecting the most vulnerable patients within our fire district, those who lack any form of insurance coverage;

Therefore, be it resolved that the Village of Trumansburg shall move forward in good faith to establish any and all requirements, policies and procedures necessary to adopt a fee-for-service EMS ambulance service with a target inception date of June 1, 2010.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE TRUMANSBURG VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT ITS REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL OF SAID VILLAGE THIS FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND NINE.

_______________________

Tammy J. Morse

Village Clerk

VOTE:

Thomas

Aye

Hart

Aye

Hrubos

Aye

Petrovic

Aye

Nottke

Nay

Jim Mason's Report

This is a report prepared by Jim Mason, that was largely ignored by the Village Board.

An Examination of the Trumansburg Fire Department Volunteer Ambulance Service

Six years ago a decision was made by the Village of Trumansburg to move to a system of paid EMS providers during the day while maintaining volunteer coverage at night. The intent of the system was to provide high quality pre-hospital emergency care for patients while operating at the lowest cost to taxpayers. The stated reason for implementing this system was the decline in the numbers of trained EMS volunteers available in the village or its environs during the daytime hours. Currently, the fire department claims thirty-three certified EMS providers within its membership. This is more than at any point in the history of the department and far more than most volunteer fire departments in the area.

Trumansburg Fire Department certified EMS providers include: 5 - CFR (Certified First Responders) 21 -EMT (Basic Emergency Medical Technicians) 1 - EMT-1 (Advanced) 5 - A-EMT-P (Advanced EMT-Paramedics) I - CCEMT-P (Critical Care EMT Paramedic)

Professional crews were nevertheless hired to staff the Fire Department's ambulance weekdays from 06:00 to 18:00 hours. Nighttime hours were to continue to be covered by fire department volunteers. This system has since proved to be problematic. The number of volunteers that are now willing or able to cover the evening shifts has fallen far short of what is needed. The task of shift coverage has fallen to a core group of about six to eight individuals.

A Task Force established by the Village recommended that a fee based operation be instituted in order to offset the cost of providing ambulance service with paid crews. As a result of the concerns raised by the residents of the fire and ambulance protection district, the fee-based proposal was temporarily tabled.

Over the past few weeks a survey of Trumansburg volunteer EMS personnel has been conducted to determine why more of them were not willing to volunteer to cover nighttime shifts. The survey also attempted to identify problem areas within the EMS delivery system as a whole and sought suggestions for improvement.

This report was prepared by Jim Mason, Life Member and former EMT with the Trumansburg Fire Company. Ron MacLean assisted with survey data analysis. The report summarizes the information collected through the survey in addition to that gleaned from one-on-one interviews with volunteers, meetings with Fire Department members and officers and others involved in the delivery of emergency medical services throughout the area. This report also includes a recommendation as to the direction the Village should take for delivering pre-hospital emergency medical services within the protection district.

Summary of Survey Responses

Seventeen of the thirty-three Trumansburg EMS providers (approx. fifty percent) responded to the survey. The following is a summary of their responses:

The survey found that nearly fifty percent of the respondents were involved in the delivery of EMS in other agencies, including paid service with Bangs Ambulance of Ithaca. Ten of the respondents have been involved in EMS more than seven years, some as long as fifteen years.

The primary factors keeping them from volunteering for more shifts were: - Already volunteering at the level they want - Work or family commitments - Burned out

Problems within the organization. - Problems with ENO (Emergency Medical Dispatching).

• The four issues identified as critical for the success of our volunteer ambulance service

were: - Patient service - Conflict management within the Department - Communication between leaders and volunteers - Volunteer retention

• The four most valuable volunteer benefits desired were:

- Excellent squad level training - Reimbursement for training - Having a role in planning - Recognition within the Department and Receiving a property tax break for service. (Tie) Note: Receiving reimbursement for fuel expense was also listed by several respondents.

The idea identified as having a negative impact was: Adding one paid crew member to all volunteer shifts. Using paid crews was perceived as having a negative impact on motivating volunteers.

• Of particular note were the concerns expressed about EMD (Emergency Medical Dispatch) protocols. - Unless Trumansburg has submitted a roster for each night's coverage, the county dispatcher automatically dispatches Bangs without giving T-Burg the opportunity to "scramble" a crew. This creates a "why bother" mentality among volunteers who might otherwise respond. - IEMD analyzes the call for its response level and automatically dispatches Bangs if the call is ALS and T-Burg is staffed at Basic.

EMD protocols require dispatchers to dispatch Bangs if T-Burg has not responded to a second tone activation. Second tones are given 4-5 minutes after the first tone. Some dispatchers are sending Bangs at a second tone even if the T-Burg crew is actively assembling and has reported this to dispatch.

Other issues raised:

The staggering training requirements being mandated by New York State on volunteer EMS providers is a significant issue. To become ALS certified, an individual must undergo classroom and practical training that is equivalent to that needed to acquire a college level Associates degree. A series of continuing education courses are then required to maintain certification and individuals must re-certify every 24 months! Average tuition for a paramedic course runs between $3,500 and $4,000. Most individuals seeking ALS certification today are doing so in order to seek employment in the EMS field, not to serve as volunteers. While certification for Basic EMT is somewhat less onerous, it still requires hundreds of hours of formal training in a classroom and hospital environment.

Over a recent five month period the Trumansburg ambulance provided emergency medical services to approximately 264 patients. Of these, sixty three, or about twenty-four percent, were determined by the dispatcher as requiring ALS coverage. On the average, only two ALS calls per week occurred on "Paid" time. The remaining calls were dispatched as requiring BLS response. Twenty-five ALS calls (less than two per week) were dispatched on "Volunteer" time. Data is not available as to how many of these calls were actually covered by volunteer ALS providers.

There are currently six ALS qualified volunteers in the TFD. Of these, only three are active. That number is now down to two because of illness. It is impossible to provide ALS coverage with only two active volunteers. Bangs is therefore frequently called upon during "volunteer" time to respond into the Trumansburg district to provide ALS coverage.

From the taxpayer's standpoint, if Basic Life Support crews were available, there is no justification for having "paid" crews for twelve hours a day at a cost in excess of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. The approximately ninety ALS calls per year could be covered by the fly car from Bangs, with Trumansburg providing transport. There are simply not enough ambulance calls in the Trumansburg Protection District to warrant full time paid crews.

Problems Identified:

The Trurnansburg Fire Department is currently operating with limited volunteer ALS staffing. The ability to continue to deliver even Basic Life Support services is also a significant concern. Of the twenty-one certified BLS providers currently in the Fire Department, seventeen must renew their certification by May of 2009. Several of these have indicated they will not be renewing their certification because of their dissatisfaction with the current system and its administration. Without these individuals, the future of the Trumansburg Fire Department volunteer ambulance service is in serious jeopardy.

Recommendations

The Trumansburg Fire Department should revert to a fully volunteer ambulance service providing Basic Life Support and transport only. On the occasions where an ALS response is required but not available, Bangs should, and would, be automatically dispatched just as they are under the present nighttime system. This would have minimal impact on patient care beyond what is currently provided. Patient care might actually improve and volunteer response could potentially go up when the volunteers feel they were again playing a key role in the system.

Such a system would however generate a dramatic savings/or the taxpayers in the Trumansburg Fire/EMS Protection District. Only those requiring ALS would be billed, and that would be the responsibility of the commercial service, not the Village.

Two calls (or less) per day can not financially support a fee-based ambulance service. Little if anything over what is currently in place would be gained by such a system, and the loss of our volunteer's service would be devastating. As one survey respondent asked, "does the Village of Trumansburg really want to be in the EMS business? Staffing, training, insurance, uniforms, vacations, liability, all for less than one or two calls per day, half of those at night when the volunteers are the primary responders?" It was also pointed out that for the Village to bill for the services provided by volunteers would be ludicrous at best.

Should the Village decide to implement a fee-based ambulance service, any ciffiliation with the

Trumansburg Fire Department must cease. The ambulance could not in any way reflect identification with TFD, and should be clearly separated from TFD's administration and budget. It would be a separate department, much like the Police Department or the Public Works Department. Even now, the public is being mislead by the Village in using paid, non-firefighters, to operate a Fire Department vehicle twelve hours a day.

We are very fortunate that most of the Trumansburg Protection District is within 10-15 minutes of the hospital's Emergency Department. In most situations, the patient could be transported to the Cayuga Medical Center under basic EMT care in less time than it takes Bangs to respond to the district. Getting the patient to the Emergency Department in the shortest possible time should be our first priority. Under the current system, more time is often spent attempting to treat the patient in the field than it would take to transport them to the hospital!

The Trumansburg Fire Department has provided the community with exemplary volunteer ambulance service for over thirty years. If the Department, for whatever reason, can not effectively continue to operate this service with volunteers, the Village should revert to a "Rescue Response" operation. Ambulance service should be provided by a privately operated "fee-based" commercial service, not the Village. Other rural townships in Tompkins County, some of them much more remote from the hospital than Trumansburg, depend solely upon fire department rescue response supplemented with ambulance service from Bangs. There is no evidence that patient care is any less effective, yet the municipalities do not incur the expense of having a taxpayer supported service. Under this type of system, only those who use it, pay for it. The Village would not have any affiliation with this service, thereby eliminating hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual cost to its taxpayers.

The challenge before us is to maintain our current EMS volunteers and increase their numbers. Aggressively addressing the concerns expressed by the survey respondents is the first step. I would then encourage the Village to seriously consider implementing some, if not all, the desired benefits for volunteers listed in this report. The cost of doing so would be insignificant in comparison to going to a paid, professional ambulance service operated by the Village.

Respectfully Submitted:

James A. Mason December 9, 2008

Sunday, May 2, 2010

New Study in JAMA

An important new study, which should inform us about the fee for service system proposed for our Trumansburg Ambulance, was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on April 14th. The title is "Health Care Insurance, Financial Concerns in Accessing Care, and Delays to Hospital Presentation in Acute Myocardial Infarction."

This study contradicts the assertion of our Mayor, and every member of the Board (with the exception of Debbie Nottke) that residents will be no more hesitant to call when in need.

Conclusion - Lack of health insurance and financial concerns about accessing care among those with health insurance were each associated with delays in seeking emergency care for AMI.

In other words, this proposed change in our EMS, is likely to kill somebody.

Here is a link to the study



Trustee Debbie Nottke is the only board member that sees this clearly because, to the best of my knowledge, she is the only member with experience in emergency medical care. She recently retired as the head nurse of the Cayuga Medical Center's ER.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Resources - EMS Billing

We are not the first municipality to struggle with this question of whether or not to save our single payer EMS system. Montgomery County Maryland has a single payer system and they have fought against the privatizers successfully for several years. Eric Bernard, the Executive Director of the Montgomery County Volunteer Fire and Rescue Association sent me these resources,

The first is a press release from the MCVFRA


********

Next we have a study published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine which concludes "economic considerations may effect EMS system utilization among under insured and low income patients experiencing a cardiac event. Prepayment systems (like our single payer system) may increase EMS utilization among these groups"
Some say this study is too old - June 2000. Key question - are economic considerations less significant today?

Annals of Emergency Medicine article

*********

Next we have Circulation - The Journal of the American Heart Association
This is from their conclusion,
financial concerns may undermine a chest pain patient’s intention to use EMS


Circulation article

*********

Finally, we have a 2008 study in Bethlehem PA - Patient and Physician Perspectives on Ambulance Utilization. Here a researcher surveyed patients after they reached the ER, and the results are interesting. For instance, twice as many patients who arrived at the ER without an ambulance said that they knew the cost of the ambulance, as those who arrived on an ambulance.

Patient and Physician Perspectives on Ambulance Utilization