New and Fringe Residential Development and Emergency Medical Services Response Times in the United States

2010

JOTM

Passenger rail service is perceived to provide important benefits to Michigan communities. However, the extent of these benefits has never been quantified in a systematic way. The study reported on here involved the performance of a broad based assessment of the community level benefits of passenger rail serv ice. The main objective of the research project was to estimate the full range of these benefits at the community level, as opposed to at the state level. Benefits were estimated for individual travelers, Amtrak expenditures, and local businesses. This research indicates local communities currently realize $62.0 million annually in benefits. Additional benefits accrue to the region, state, and nation in the form of congestion relief, air quality improvement, energy conservation, and safety.

Section: Dea Input-output Measures and Related Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking and evaluating the comparative efficiency of urban paratransit systems in the United States: A data envelopment analysis approach

2010

JOTM

“…Table II shows that when average EMS response time is considered along with average yearly call volume (Williams, 2001(Williams, -2007 Table III shows that those statistically significant independent variables ( p , 0.05) are again median age of homes and the density index along with land area, which has a positive impact on the DEA efficiency score. The land area sign is incongruent with the findings of Lambert and Meyer (2008) that show a negative impact on average EMS time, although their analysis is based mostly upon large, ex-urban EMS coverage areas which tend to have longer run times. Perhaps, within urban jurisdictions, larger cities (both population wise and geographically) have greater resources (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…This index is used as a proxy for a "sprawl index" which is commonly used in the urban studies literature McCann and Ewing, 2003;Cutsinger et al, 2005). These sprawl indices were either calculated at the county or MSA level, and when comparing a county level density index similar to the one used here to a county level sprawl index, Lambert and Meyer (2008) found a large, inverse correlation (r ¼ 20.95) between the two. The two indices overlap considerably, and a density index is just the inverse of a sprawl index, so therefore, in regression analysis, one would expect the signs of the two variables to be different, while yielding the same or similar coefficients in absolute magnitude.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This is used as a proxy for a municipality's ability to adequately fund EMS provision. We posit the hypothesis that higher income cities, ceteris paribus, will spend more on EMS because they have better Efficiency of emergency medical services tax bases and larger financial resources (Felder and Brinkmann, 2002;Lambert and Meyer, 2008). Also, Jones-Lee (1976) and Johannson (1995) observed that higher income levels are associated with stronger preferences for better health and safety.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benchmarking and measuring the comparative efficiency of emergency medical services in major US cities

Benchmarking: An International Journal

Srinivasan

2009

Self Cite

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to benchmark and measure the comparative efficiency of emergency medical services (EMS) in major US cities (populations greater than 100,000). In so doing, this paper aims to develop a benchmark that can be emulated by cities lagging in EMS efficiency. Also, it seeks to develop a profile of cities that are successful in providing highly efficient EMS as benchmarks. Design/methodology/approach -Data envelopment analysis is used to measure the EMS efficiency of 127 selected large cities in the USA under the premise of a constant-return to scales method of service delivery. In addition, to identify factors influencing the US cities' EMS efficiency and then to predict their efficiency scores, a Tobit regression analysis is employed, which tended to result in a smaller standard error, a smaller bias, and a smaller mean squared error than ordinary least squares. Findings -This paper examines whether more densely settled and populated areas have greater efficiency in delivering EMS. After controlling variables such as weather and climate, income, population growth, the age of a residential home, and geographic size of a city in land area, It is found that more densely settled, geographically large, and high income cities show more efficient provision of EMS. Originality/value -This paper is the first to develop in a comprehensive way EMS benchmark performance standards for municipal governments and elaborate on a host of factors which are associated with the success of EMS deliveries. By setting such standards and identifying factors affecting EMS efficiency, this paper helps municipal governments to continuously improve their EMS and develop more efficient public policy.

“…This is used as a proxy for a state's ability and capacity to raise the tax revenues necessary to carry out road construction and maintenance projects. In other words, we made a premise that higher income states, ceteris paribus, can afford to invest more in their road infrastructure because they have better tax bases and greater financial resources (Lambert and Meyer, 2008…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploratory evaluation of state road provision to commuters and shippers

Benchmarking: An International Journal

2015

Purpose – Due to mounting fiscal pressures, the federal government as well as many state and municipal governments in the USA have had to re-examine their transportation policies. Tax increases and/or spending cuts which aim to trim budget deficits are preoccupations of most policy makers and legislative bodies nowadays. With regard to the task of building new or rehabilitating old bridges, highways, and toll gates, cost-benefit analysis and economic impact studies are often undertaken by various government entities to rank and prioritize spending in the hopes of maximizing fiscal efficiency and road usage benefits. Since most highway construction and maintenance expenditures are absorbed by state governments, it is mostly up to state policy makers to decide transportation priorities. Not much research to date has been conducted to evaluate the comparative efficiency of state road provision to commuters and shippers. Such research would be useful to a state government’s budgetary allocation, road planning, and spending plans. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – This paper uses data envelopment analysis under both constant and variable returns-to-scale and then to explain variations in efficiency ratings by using Tobit regression analysis. Findings – The authors discovered that the greater the level of state resident income and/or the warmer the weather, the higher the road or mass transit provision efficiency on average. The authors also found that greater urbanization in a state had little to do with efficiencies with respect to road provision. Originality/value – This paper is one of the first to assess and evaluate the comparative efficiency of road provision across 50 states in the USA and then set a benchmark for utilizing state financial resources to improve road infrastructure. More importantly, this paper helps transportation planners and public policy makers better allocate their limited financial resources to public goods in time of budget cutbacks and shortfalls.