This chart in the presentation compares Average Response Time for Priority One Calls in2007-2008 and 2020-2021. It's not an apples to apples comparison given the City Auditor's noteon the most recent Annual City Services Report (Page117 - City Services Report 20/21). It's onthe bottom of the 2nd graphic with an asterisk. The methodology changed in 18-19 and the priormethodology was incorrectly affecting response times. Doesn't seem fair to compare unless thesame methodology is applied to all years prior to 18/19.
It would be great if there's an explanation of who sets the target response time. Is it a federalstandard or is it set by the City?
Also I'm wondering where that 2007-2008 # of Emergency Calls Received figure comes from inthe table. It looks understated by about 100,000. It seems to be understating historical calls forservice and also using an apples to oranges comparison in terms of Priority 1 Response Timesgiven the change in methodology in FY 18/19. The City Services Report (linked) has the twographics below, which show Emergency calls at 501,385 in 2007/2008, not 403,983. Am Imissing something? https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/11417/636664899465600000.
I've explained that the methodology for Priority 1 Response Times changed in 18/19. If the citystill chose to compare response times from more than a decade ago to now, I think it's worthpointing out that in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 the Priority 1 Response Times were 7.0 and 7.1respectively. The number 5.9used in the table looksto be the lowest in the last two decades.7.0 and 7.1 happened even with an authorized sworn staffing level of 1,370.
We would have the same Priority 1 Response Time as 2005-2007 and 211 less BudgetedSworn FTE and 129,000 more emergency calls.