RULES AND REGULATIONS
PENNSYLVANIA EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY
[4 PA. CODE CH. 120d]
911 Performance Review and Quality Assurance Standards
[30 Pa.B. 4238] A. Statutory Authority
The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency (PEMA), under the authority contained in 35 Pa.C.S. § 7313 (relating to power to adopt regulations) (act) adopts Chapter 120d (relating to performance review and quality assurance standards) to read as set forth in Annex A. These final-form regulations were previously published as proposed rulemaking at 29 Pa.B. 1717 (April 3, 1999).
B. Effective Date
These final-form regulations will become effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
C. Background and Purpose
These final-form regulations are needed to promote the general public's health, safety and welfare by establishing standards for performance review and quality assurance programs for the operation of county or municipal 911 emergency communications centers and remote dispatch points located throughout this Commonwealth. The standards contained in these regulations are designed to promote Statewide adherence to established 911 center goals and procedures, to facilitate the learning process for 911 center personnel and to provide a framework for the continuous improvement of the overall operation of 911 emergency communications centers in this Commonwealth.
D. Comments
Written comments, suggestions and possible changes were solicited within a 30-day period after the proposed amendments were published. Comments were received from the emergency communications offices of Berks and Northampton Counties, the City of Philadelphia Fire Department and the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors.
Following the close of the public comment period, PEMA received comments from the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC). The final-form regulations contained in Annex A are responsive to the comments and suggestions received from the commentators.
For ease of reference, PEMA will address the comments in the order in which the regulatory sections appear.
§ 120d.102. Definitions
IRRC commented that the term ''quality assurance review'' was defined in this section but that PEMA then used the term ''audit'' to refer to quality assurance reviews in other sections of the regulations. For consistency and clarity reasons, IRRC recommended that ''quality assurance review'' should be used in place of the word ''audit.'' PEMA agreed with this comment and has replaced the word ''audit'' with the term ''quality assurance review'' throughout these final-form regulations.
IRRC also recommended that a new definition for ''quality assurance action'' be added to the regulations to identify who is responsible for initiating the actions and when the actions will be imposed. PEMA agreed with this comment and added the new definition of ''quality assurance action'' to clarify when this process will be performed by the quality assurance reviewer.
For clarification purposes, PEMA rewrote the definition of ''catastrophic loss'' to state that a loss means the loss of three or more human lives or property damage or loss exceeding $75,000.
PEMA also rewrote the definition of ''communications center'' to state that the definition includes ''remote dispatch points'' and to state that a communications center may be operated by a county, city, borough or township.
§ 120d.103. Scope
IRRC and a commentator questioned whether this section will apply to the staffs of ''remote dispatch points'' (RDPs). New subsection (b) makes it clear that any county, city, borough or township that operates an RDP included in a 911 county plan shall be responsible for implementing the performance review and quality assurance standards of this chapter.
By way of background, RDPs dispatch local police units, private ambulance services and local fire companies within the jurisdictional boundaries of a municipality. Because RDPs play a vital role in the dispatch of emergency services, RDPs and 911 communications centers are joined together in an interdependent and mutually supporting relationship. The important communications and public safety linkage between RDPs and 911 communications centers is why most RDPs are clearly identified in a county's 911 plan as being a vital part of the county's overall 911 emergency communications and dispatch program. Under the provisions of a county 911 plan, calls to a 911 communications center for emergency response assistance can be transferred to an RDP when a dispatcher determines the appropriate emergency response and dispatches the necessary equipment and personnel. For this reason, both RDP personnel and county 911 communications center personnel shall meet the same performance review and quality assurance standards in this chapter to ensure that those personnel will provide the most effective, timely and professional emergency communications and dispatch services to the general public during life threatening, public safety and other types of emergency situations.
PEMA's statutory authorities for these final-form regulations are the Public Safety Emergency Telephone Act (act) (35 P. S. §§ 7011--7021) and 35 Pa.C.S. §§ 7101--7707 (relating to Emergency Management Service Code) (code). Section 3(a)(8) of the act (35 P. S. § 7013(a)(8)) requires PEMA ''to establish standards for performance review and quality assurance programs for 911 systems to ensure public safety and improve the performance of 911 systems.'' Section 5(c) of the act (35 P. S. § 7015(c)) requires that PEMA review all county plans for completeness. The act defines a county plan as ''A document submitted by the county on a triennial basis to the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, outlining its proposed or existing 911 system, including a contribution rate, for the forthcoming three years.'' Thus, if any county 911 plan describes or includes an RDP in it emergency communications and dispatch protocols and procedures, PEMA considers that RDP to be a vital component of the county's 911 emergency communications system and those RDP personnel are subject to the quality assurance requirements of this chapter. Conversely, any RDPs not mentioned in a county's 911 plan are not considered by PEMA to be a vital or integral part of a county's 911 emergency communications system. For this reason, those RDP personnel are not required to participate in this chapter's performance review and quality assurance program.
The second authority that PEMA used for the development of this quality assurance program is found in section 7313(3) and (9) of the code (relating to powers and duties).
Section 7313(3) of the code permits PEMA to develop regulations for a wide range of emergency management services and activities. Because 911 activities involve emergency communications and the emergency dispatch of medical and health services, firefighting services, police services and rescue services, all 911 services clearly come within the definition of ''emergency services'' as defined in section 7102 of the code (relating to definitions). Thus, PEMA's authority to develop and promulgate regulations under section 7313(3) of the code provides additional statutory authority for the promulgation of these final-form regulations.
More specifically, section 7313(9) of the code allows PEMA to ''make or request of Commonwealth or local agencies and officials, studies, surveys and reports as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this part.''
Therefore, PEMA used the authority of both the act and the code to not only develop the 911 performance review and quality assurance standards for call takers, dispatchers and supervisors but also to establish a quality assurance review process by which counties and municipalities must periodically review the performance of their 911 communication center or RDP personnel and maintain reports and records on their performance. The maintenance of the quality assurance review forms and reports will ensure all 911 center personnel and RDP personnel in the 67 counties possess the mandated standard levels of training and competency which will enable the general public to receive the most effective and timely emergency response services available.
One other comment remains concerning § 120d.103. IRRC and one county questioned whether or not counties would be responsible for performing quality assurance reviews of RDP employes. PEMA believes that each city, borough or township that operates an RDP needs to be responsible for conducting the quality assurance reviews because the RDP personnel are their employes, not the employes of a county. As a result, § 120d.103(b) clearly states that each city, borough or township that operates an RDP shall be responsible for implementing the quality assurance provisions of this chapter as they apply to their employes.
§ 120d.104. Timeframes and procedures for quality assurance reviews
IRRC commented that this section should include specific performance criteria that the quality assurance reviewer would use when examining a telecommunicator's work. IRRC suggested that if the reviewer is to use the criteria or standards in § 120d.105 (relating to quality assurance review standards), § 120d.104 should reference § 120d.105. PEMA agrees with this comment and has included the necessary reference to § 120d.105 in this section.
IRRC recommended that the words ''It is also recommended'' be removed from the last sentence of § 120d.104(a) because it is inappropriate regulatory language. PEMA agreed and the phrase has been removed from the subsection.
IRRC commented that § 120d.104(b) also contained the words ''Although it is recommended'' which is inappropriate regulatory language. PEMA agreed and has removed that phrase from this subsection. IRRC further commented that if PEMA intended to establish an exception to the weekly call taking quality assurance review, it should expressly state when the exception is applicable. PEMA agreed with this comment and has rewritten the subsection to state that while an exception will be allowed from the weekly call taking quality assurance review, the monthly review process may not last longer than 90 days without the written permission of PEMA.
IRRC commented that § 120d.104(d) contained the words ''It is recommended'' which is inappropriate regulatory language. PEMA agreed and has removed the phrase from this subsection.
IRRC and two commentators expressed concern that recorded 911 calls will be included as part of the quality assurance review and thus be subject to Pennsylvania's act of June 21, 1957 (P. L. 390, No. 212) (66 P. S. §§ 66.1--66.4), known as the Right-To-Know Law. PEMA does not share this concern because this regulation does not require any quality assurance reviews, individual 911 calls or any 911 performance review reports to be included in a county 911 plan. As a result, any 911 calls will not become part of a public record that would be subject to the Right-To-Know Law. Nevertheless, to remove any further concern about this matter, § 120d.104(e) has been rewritten to state that ''Actual transcripts or recordings of phone calls made to or from a 911 communication center or remote dispatch point are not public records under the Right-To-Know Law and may not be included in the text of any quality assurance review.''
IRRC also questioned the need to retain quality assurance reviews for 3 years as mentioned in § 120d.104(e). PEMA reexamined this need and has reduced the retention period to 1-year.
§ 120d.105. Quality assurance review standards
IRRC and one commentator questioned the requirement in § 120d.105(b) that a telecommunicator must dispatch police, fire or emergency medical services units within 90 seconds of obtaining pertinent information, 90% of the time. The county commentator stated that in large counties with a high volume of 911 calls, the county is required to dispatch personnel on a priority basis. PEMA recognizes that the volume of 911 calls vary greatly from one county's 911 communications center to another. As a result, this subsection has been rewritten to state that a telecommunicator will dispatch emergency response units within the prescribed time frame established by the 911 center's or RDP's standard operating procedures. The 90-second requirement has been eliminated. This change will provide all of the counties with the flexibility that they need to determine the time frame that a telecommunicator shall follow in the dispatch of emergency response units.
IRRC commented that § 120d.105(b)(8) contained a general reference to Federal Communications Commission rules and regulations that needs to be more specific. PEMA has reexamined this requirement and removed the reference in its entirety because it was not needed.
IRRC and one commentator observed that the Department of Health is not required to review and approve the emergency medical dispatch program as a requisite to its use by the 911 communications center as so stated in § 120d.105(c). Based upon this observation, PEMA deleted the reference to the Department of Health's approval of the emergency medical dispatch program. Instead, each 911 communications center or remote dispatch point shall use the emergency medical dispatch protocols that it is licensed to use.
Lastly, IRRC and one commentator stated that some of the quality assurance review standards in § 120d.105(a) and (b) were too subjective and provided the quality assurance reviewer with too much discretion in evaluating performance. PEMA disagreed. The quality assurance standards contained in this subsection require each telecommunicator to be evaluated by a set of clear and specific performance criteria. These standards are currently being used by numerous counties throughout this Commonwealth in existing quality assurance programs. Therefore, because these standards were developed in close consultation with those counties, PEMA believes that the quality assurance standards as contained in this subsection are not only reasonable and adequately descriptive in nature but also widely acceptable to the 911 communications community that must implement these standards.
E. Fiscal Impact/Affected Persons
These final-form regulations will require the counties to incur costs in the implementation and administration of these performance review and quality assurance standards. However, the costs should be minimal because most counties already have existing quality assurance programs in place. In addition, the act of February 12, 1998 (P. L. 1998, No. 17) (Act 17) makes training costs an eligible expenditure from county 911 fees that are collected under the authority of the act. As a result, because the performance review and quality assurance program is interrelated and dependent upon the effectiveness of an overall training program, the counties will be able to budget for these costs through an already existing fee collection program.
The citizens of this Commonwealth will benefit from the improved quality assurance standards established for 911 emergency communications center personnel which will result in those personnel providing more effective, timely and professional emergency communications and dispatch services to the general public during emergency medical, fire, police and other possible lifethreatening or safety situations.
F. Paperwork Requirements
These final-form regulations will require a modest increase in the amount of paperwork that State agencies and counties must prepare as part of the administration of their 911 emergency communications systems.
G. Sunset Requirements
PEMA has not set a sunset date for these regulations because all county 911 emergency communications systems operate on a continuing basis. PEMA continues to monitor those systems and will propose amendments to these final-form regulations when required.
H. Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), on March 18, 1999, a copy of the proposed rulemaking, published at 29 Pa.B. 1717, was submitted to IRRC and the Chairpersons of the Senate State Government Committee and the House Veterans Affairs and Emergency Preparedness Committee for review and comment.
In compliance with section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act, PEMA also provided IRRC and the Committees with copies of all comments received from the public. In preparing these final-form regulations, PEMA has considered all comments received from IRRC, the Committees and the public.
Under section 5.1(d) of the Regulatory Review Act, these final-form regulations were deemed approved by the House and Senate Committees on June 12, 2000. IRRC met on June 22, 2000, and approved the amendments in accordance with section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act.
I. Contact Person
Questions regarding these final-form regulations may be directed to Mark Goodwin, Chief Counsel, Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, 2605 Interstate Drive, Harrisburg, PA 17110-9364.
J. Findings
PEMA finds that:
(1) Public notice of proposed rulemaking was given under sections 201 and 202 of the act of July 31, 1968 (P. L. 769, No. 240) (45 P. S. §§ 1201 and 1202) and the regulations promulgated thereunder in 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1 and 7.2.
(2) A public comment period was provided as required by law and all comments were considered.
(3) These regulations are necessary and appropriate for the administration of the act.
K. Order
PEMA, acting under the authority of the act and the code, orders that:
(a) The regulations of PEMA, 4 Pa. Code, are amended by adding §§ 120d.101--120d.105 to read as set forth in Annex A.
(b) PEMA shall submit this order and Annex A to the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Attorney General for approval as to legality and form as required by law.
(c) PEMA shall certify this order and Annex A and deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau as required by law.
(d) This order shall take effect immediately upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
DAVID L. SMITH,
Director(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, relating to this document, see 30 Pa.B. 3534 (July 8, 2000).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 30-53 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulations.
Annex A
TITLE 4. ADMINISTRATION
PART V. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
CHAPTER 120d. 911 PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND QUALITY ASSURANCE STANDARDS Sec.
120d.101. Purpose. 120d.102. Definitions. 120d.103. Scope. 120d.104. Time frames and procedures for quality assurance reviews. 120d.105. Quality assurance review standards. § 120d.101. Purpose.
(a) This chapter implements section 3(a)(8) of the act (35 P. S. § 7013(a)(8)) which was added by section 3(a)(8) of the act of February 12, 1998 (P. L. 64, No. 17) to establish standards for performance review and quality assurance programs for 911 emergency communications systems operating in this Commonwealth. The quality assurance standards in this chapter are designed to:
(1) Promote Statewide adherence to established 911 communications center goals and procedures.
(2) Facilitate the learning process for 911 communications center personnel.
(3) Provide a framework for the continuous improvement of the overall operation of 911 communications centers in this Commonwealth.
(b) These procedures will also provide the operational standards that are needed to ensure that 911 communications centers consistently provide the best possible emergency communications service to the citizens of this Commonwealth.
§ 120d.102. Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Act--The Public Safety Emergency Telephone Act (35 P. S. §§ 7011--7021).
Agency--The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency.
Call-taking--The act of answering 911 calls from the public and obtaining the information necessary to dispatch a public safety unit, such as fire, police, medical and rescue, to the reported location of the emergency.
Catastrophic loss--The loss of three or more human lives or property damage or loss exceeding $75,000.
Day--Refers to an actual 24-hour day, not a ''working day.''
Dispatching--The act of alerting and directing the response of public safety units to the desired location.
Emergency dispatched calls--Emergency incidents to which a 911 communications center dispatches public safety units.
Emergency medical dispatch protocols--A system or program that enables patients to be assessed and treated via telephone by utilizing current accepted emergency medical dispatch standards.
911 communications center--A 911 Public Safety Answering Point or PSAP; also referred to as a remote dispatch point in this chapter. A communications center may be operated by a county, city, borough or township.
Performance appraisal--A yearly written evaluation of a telecommunicator's job performance measured against established 911 communications center expectations and standards.
Quality assurance action--An action taken by a quality assurance reviewer or 911 center supervisor after the occurrence of a quality assurance review of a telecommunicator to correct or improve job performance deficiencies identified by the quality assurance review. The quality assurance action may require the telecommunicator to take additional training courses or instruction, be subject to a second quality assurance review process outside of the normal time frames identified in this section, or be subject to disciplinary or other personnel actions deemed appropriate by the 911 communications center supervisor or reviewer.
Quality assurance review--A quality assurance process that is used to assess the job performance of a telecommunicator.
Radio activity--The act of dispatching and communicating on a public safety radio frequency.
Standard operating procedures--A set of policies and procedures developed and adopted by a 911 communications center to aid in directing the daily operations of the telecommunications staff.
Telecommunicator--A full-time or part-time 911 communications center call-taker or emergency dispatcher.
§ 120d.103. Scope.
(a) The quality assurance reviews in this chapter will be employed in accordance with the time frames in § 120d.104 (relating to time frames and procedures for quality assurance reviews). These reviews will be used to evaluate the performance of various aspects of a telecommunicator's duties. In addition to measuring individual performance, these reviews will aid in determining whether the processes used by the telecommunicators are functionally efficient on a regular basis.
(b) The quality assurance provisions in this chapter apply to all 911 communications centers operating in this Commonwealth and to all remote dispatch points operated by a city, borough or township of this Commonwealth which are included within the 911 communications system identified in a county 911 plan. Each county, city, borough or township that operates a 911 communications center or remote dispatch point included in a 911 county plan is responsible for implementing the quality assurance provisions of this chapter as they apply to their employes.
§ 120d.104. Time frames and procedures for quality assurance reviews.
(a) A random sampling of 911 communications center calls will be reviewed on a recurring basis by the quality assurance reviewer to ensure compliance with the quality assurance review standards in § 120d.105 (relating to quality assurance review standards), as well as those outlined in the standard operating procedures of each 911 communications center or remote dispatch point. If needed, additional quality assurance reviews will be performed to ensure that each telecommunicator receives a minimum of one call-taking quality assurance review per month. All calls, whether voice or TDD/TTY, will be reviewed in the same manner. The quality assurance reviewer shall complete a review form for each quality assurance review. All incidents involving catastrophic loss shall be included in the quality assurance review process.
(b) A minimum of ten call-taking quality assurance reviews shall be performed each week in 911 communications centers and remote dispatch points that dispatch, on average, 72 or less emergency dispatch calls per day. Those 911 communications centers and remote dispatch points that average more than 72 emergency dispatch calls per day shall perform a weekly quality assurance review of 2% of the total 911 calls that they process per week. The weekly quality assurance review process may assume a monthly review process to accommodate those 911 centers that may have personnel or scheduling constraints. A monthly quality assurance review may not last for more than 90 days without the written permission of the Agency. In addition, the minimum number of quality assurance reviews required by this subsection shall remain unchanged during the monthly review process.
(c) Twice each year, the quality assurance reviewer will review a segment of each telecommunicator's radio activity to determine adherence to the 911 communications center's or remote dispatch point's dispatch standards. At a minimum, each segment of the telecommunicator's radio activity that is monitored shall contain three emergency dispatched calls. The quality assurance reviewer will complete a quality assurance review form for each segment reviewed. The review form will be supplied by the Agency.
(d) The quality assurance reviewer will be designated by the director of each 911 communications center or remote dispatch point. The reviewer shall be at a supervisory level with a minimum of 3 years experience in the field of emergency telecommunications. Internal standards shall be established to ensure that the quality assurance review process is executed with consistency and objectivity.
(e) To provide optimum feedback, the date selected for a quality assurance review will not exceed 5 days prior to the review. Telecommunicators shall receive the results of their quality assurance review within 5 days of the review. Copies of each quality assurance review will be retained on file at the 911 communications center for 1 year. Actual transcripts or recordings of phone calls made to and from a 911 communications center or remote dispatch point are not public records under the act of June 21, 1957 (P. L. 390, No. 212) (66 P. S. §§ 66.1--66.4), known as the Right-to-Know Law, and may not be included in the text of any quality assurance review.
(f) The quality assurance reviews will be used to support the development and assessment of goals and expectations on the telecommunicator's yearly performance appraisal. The quality assurance reviews will also be used to identify areas of the telecommunicator's job performance which may require additional or supplemental training, and aid in determining whether any processes of the 911 communications center or remote dispatch point require modification or change.
(g) All telecommunicators, whether they are part-time or full-time employes of the 911 communications center or remote dispatch point, shall be subject to this quality assurance review process.
(h) Quality assurance actions that are initiated in response to the results of a quality assurance review will be documented and placed in the 911 communications center's or remote dispatch point's records.
§ 120d.105. Quality assurance review standards.
(a) Call-taking (telephone performance). The following telecommunicator performance standards will be checked by the quality assurance reviewer during each quality assurance review:
(1) Answers the telephone quickly and correctly (within 10 seconds of the call, 90% of the time).
(2) Asks and verifies the location of the incident or emergency.
(3) Obtains the callback phone number from the person making the call.
(4) Determines the nature of the incident or emergency and selects and assigns the appropriate response to the incident.
(5) Accomplishes the tasks listed in paragraphs (1)--(4) quickly and effectively (within 60 seconds of the receipt of the phone call, 90% of the time).
(6) Obtains all pertinent information and makes updates accordingly and keeps the caller on the line until all required information is obtained.
(7) Controls the conversation with the caller, explains all possible emergency actions and employs calming techniques when required.
(8) Exhibits a calm and professional demeanor at all times and acts in a courteous and tactful manner.
(9) Demonstrates proper documentation of the information received on call-taker screens or cards.
(b) Dispatching (radio performance). The following telecommunicator radio performance standards will be checked by the quality assurance reviewer during each quality assurance review:
(1) Dispatches the appropriate police, fire or EMS units within the prescribed time frame established by the 911 emergency communication center's or remote dispatch point's standard operating procedures.
(2) Provides all pertinent information to the responding police, fire or EMS units and relays updated information about the incident or emergency to the responding units.
(3) Answers all radio transmissions promptly.
(4) Speaks clearly and concisely to the responding units.
(5) Listens attentively and understands each message that is received from the responding units.
(6) Exhibits a timely response to requests from field units.
(7) Maintains a calm and professional demeanor at all times.
(c) Emergency medical dispatch. Emergency medical dispatch protocols will be utilized by all 911 emergency communications centers and remote dispatch points. Due to the existence of various emergency medical dispatch programs, each 911 emergency communications center and remote dispatch point shall use the quality assurance process associated with the program that it is licensed to use.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 00-1382. Filed for public inspection August 11, 2000, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
