Lee County EMS

Customer Satisfaction Survey Design for Six Sigma (DFSS)

February 23, 2007

Project Team

Team Members Lt. Chris Sutton Lt. Tom Pillsy FTO Jim McFee EMT Steve Lupe Admin. Asst. Ruth Boonstra

Team Facilitators Capt. Art Garcia Lt. Todd Bardell

Sponsor Chief Kim Dickerson Capt. Art Garcia

Lee County EMSMission & Vision

Mission StatementTo provide the highest quality out-of-hospital emergency

medical care and transportation for the residentsand visitors of Lee county, Florida.

Our highly trained professionals use the best technology to meet the needs of those who require assistance.

Vision StatementTo be a leader in our profession and serve as a role model

for other emergency medical services agencies and is an organization that people are proud to be

associated with.

Define Phase

How do we know how we are doing? Does our service meet the publics expectation’s? How do we go about measuring this? Does our current Customer Satisfaction Survey

(CSS) collect what we need? Are we delivering it to the customer in a way to

get a response?

Define PhaseProblem Statement

CSS shows voice of the Organization CSS has a low response rate CSS uses a single methodology CSS does not appear to meet the QI needs of the

organization CSS content and design not representative of DPS/LCEMS

intent to exceed customer expectations Completed CSS forms are not being processed consistently

or in a timely fashion CSS results/responses do not receive consistent follow-up

Measure PhaseLCEMS Customer Satisfaction Survey Return Percentage

Surveys Not

Returned

92%

Surveys Returned

8%

Each LCEMS patient received a survey with their fi rst statement with a request to fi ll out and return. This chart represents surveys sent f rom the beginning of the project to the fi rst week in September 2006 as

reported by LCEMS.

Measure PhaseHow the Returned Surveys Were Handled

Surveys Scanned & Entered

64%

Surveys Scanned & Not Entered

29%

Surveys Not Scanned & Not

Entered7%

Returned surveys are to be entered into an access database

and scanned to Adobe documents f or distribution and

archiving. This chart represents surveys returned f rom the

beginning of the project to the fi rst week in September 2006

as reported by LCEMS

Project Impact

Goal:

To define the DPS/LCEMS mission and commitment to exceed customer expectations

To design and implement a CSS process that allows LCEMS to identify exemplary customer service and detect and eliminate detrimental performance and practices

Project Scope

In ScopeCustomers who were transported to a Lee

County hospital

Out of ScopeRefusals, minors, deceased

Analyze Phase

Poor returnFont?Color?Bill?

No other survey methods currently being used

Improve Phase

Voice of the agencyDirector of Public SafetyDeputy Director of Public SafetyDeputy Director of Public Safety, EMSOperations Chief EMSQuality Improvement/Quality Assurance

Manager

Improve Phase

Voice of the customerOther validated, existing customer satisfaction

surveys Multnomah County, OR Stanislaus County, CA

Further to be determined by focus groups

Improve Phase

HIPAACounty Attorney office contacted for review of

project material for patient confidentiality issues

Improve Phase

Mail Surveys Face to Face Focus Groups Telephone Surveys

Improve Phase Questions rated on a 1-4 scale

4 being the most desirable rating 1 being the least desirable rating

Evaluated whether the public recognized who we are Evaluated whether the hospital destination is customer

choice or not; and whether it was explained to them Determine potential focus group participation

Improve Phase Mail Survey

Improve legibility of questions Improve formatting of questionsStandardize the responses to facilitate

evaluating responsesAdded a cover letter (February only)Additional cost for colorAdditional cost for extra pageShould it go out with the BILL

Improve PhaseCover Letter

Improve Phase

Larger font

Standard Responses

ImprovePhase

ImprovePhase

Improve Phase - Pilot

Mail Survey

On Going

Improve Phase - Pilot

Face to Face Top 3 questions from mail survey

District Supervisor assistanceMinimum of 2 a day at area hospitals44 interviews done

Improve Phase - Pilot

Focus groups determined to be difficult to do in pilot (to be used at a later time)

Potential participation to be determined in phone interviews

Use in the control phase

Improve Phase - Pilot

Telephone SurveysSame as mail surveyContacted all transported patients who were

in the project scope

Improve Phase - Pilot

Goal of 50 completed telephone surveys 134 calls were made to get 35 responses No family member were allowed to answer

for the patient No Minors were allowed to participate

Improve PhaseScore

4

2 Responses: 36

3

1 Average: 2.92

1

4

4

4

3

4

2

Shows average of responses per question

“The emergency service personnel were courteous and respectful throughout my experience”:

1 2 3 4Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly disagree

Shows number of surveys returned

Average: 2.92Show that the response to this question, overall, was between

Disagree and Agree

Control Phase

To be turned over to Chief Dickerson and Capt. Garcia

What we found out Face to Face

Courteous and RescpectfulAverage 3.50

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50

Appeared and Acted ProfessionalAverage 3.55

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50

Competence and KnowledgeAverage 3.48

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50

1 - Strongly disagree

2 - Disagree

3 - Agree

4 – Strongly Agree

Average 3.5

What we found out Phone Survey Answered survey 33 25%

Incomplete surveys 2 1%Refused to participate 9 7%Not eligible 12 9%No answer 22 16%Answering machine 28 21%Busy signal 3 2%Not a valid customer 2 1%Nonworking number 17 13%Respondent not home 6 4%Total called 134 100%

No phone number 46 24%Underage 10 5%Numbers dialed 134 71%Total systematic (Every 10th) 190 100%

What we found outEvery 10th Number Listed

46

10

134

190

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

No PhoneNumber

Underage Numbers Dialed Total Systematic(Every 10th)

Called/Not Called

134 Numbers Dialed

33

2

9

12

22

28

3 2

17

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Answer

ed S

urve

y

Inco

mple

te su

rvey

s

Refus

ed to

par

ticipa

te

Not E

ligibl

e

No an

swer

Answer

ing M

achi

ne

Busy S

ignal

Not a

Vali

d Cus

tom

er

Nonwor

king

Numbe

r

Respo

ndan

t Not

Hom

e

What we found outCourteous and Respectful

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Responses: 35

Average: 3.69

Appeared and Acted Professional

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

1 2 3 4Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

Responses: 34

Average: 3.53

Competent and Knowledgeable

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Responses: 34

Average: 3.82

What we found outEMS Response

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Responses: 31

Average: 3.48

EMS kept the patient informed

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Very Quick

Quick

Slow

Very Slow

Responses: 33

Average: 3.64

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

What we found outCleanliness

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Responses: 30

Average: 3.70

Did we meet expectations?

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Very Clean

Clean

Dirty

Very Dirty

Responses: 33

Average: 3.67

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

What we found outEMS showed concern for family

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Responses: 29

Average: 3.38

EMS showed concern for patient comfort

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Responses: 31

Average: 3.77

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

What we found out Hospital Choice/Explained

29

20

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

NO YES

Who was on Scene

15

6

30

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Don't Know

Fire Fighters

Police or Sheriff

LCEMS

What we found out

Overall

1

2

3

4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Responses: 34

Average: 3.79

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

What we found out

Potential Focus Group Participation

23

12

0

5

10

15

20

25

No Yes

Recommendations

Organize focus groups quarterly Evaluate mail survey Continue face to face interviews when

possible Continue phone surveys monthly Consider professional marketing agency Share results with agency

Questions?