Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:14:36.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Privatization and Emergency Medical Services

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Stephan G. Reissman
Stephan G. Reissman*
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Denver, CO 80204, USA
*
721 Erie Street, Oak Park, IL 60302USA Telephone/Facsimile (708) 386-4433
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Osborne and Gaebler's Reinventing Government has sparked discussion amongst elected officials, civil servants, the media, and the general public regarding advantages of privatizing government services. Its support stems from an effort to provide services to municipalities while reducing taxpayer expenditure. Many echo the sentiment of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, who said, “It is not government's obligation to provide services, but to see that they're provided.” Even in the area of public safety, privatization has found a “market.”

In many localities, privatizing Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is a popular and successful method for providing ambulance services. Privately owned ambulance services staff and respond to medical emergencies in a given community as part of the 9–1–1 emergency response system. Regulations for acceptable response times, equipment, and other essential components of EMS systems are specified by contract. This allows the municipality oversight of the service provided, but it does not provide the service directly. As will be discussed, this “contracting-out” model has many benefits.

Privatizing EMS services is a decision based not only on cost-savings, but on accountability. A thorough evaluation must be utilized in the selection process. Issues of efficiency, effectiveness, quality, customer service, responsiveness, and equity must be considered by the government, in addition to cost of service.

The uncertain future of health care in the United States has led those in EMS to look beyond the field's internal market to explore additional opportunities for expanding and redefining its roles beyond emergency care. It is important, however, to consider how emergency medical care, the original role of EMS, can be best delivered. Responding to emergencies is not just one of the functions involved in this field, it is the principal function from which public perception of EMS is formed, and from which support for entering other markets can be fostered.

The purpose of this paper is to present several important concepts and considerations that public officials, medical directors, and the public must be aware of when contemplating the possibility of privatizing their Emergency Medical Services. A review of the general concepts of privatization and issues of accountability will be presented, referencing policy experts, followed by an examination of how advocates of privatization might see these issues as they relate to providing EMS. The conclusion will present prescriptions for both municipal and commercial ambulance providers.

Keywords

accountabilityefficiencyemergency medical servicesequityhealth careprivate ambulance providersprivatizationreinventing government
Type
Theoretical Discussion
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 1997 , pp. 22 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Osborne, D, Gaebler, T: Reinventing Government. Reading Massachusetts, Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1992.Google Scholar
2. Chandler, R, Piano, J: The Public Administration Dictionary. Santa Barbara, California, ABC-CLIO, 1988.Google Scholar
3. Fitzgerald, R: When Government Goes Private: Successful Alternatives to Public Services, New York, Universe Books, 1988.Google Scholar
4. Rehfuss, JA: Contracting Out in Government. San Francisco, California, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1989.Google Scholar
5. Donahue, JA: The Privatization Decision, Basic Books, US, 1989.Google Scholar
6. President's Commission on Privatization: Privatization: Toward More Effective Government. 1988.Google Scholar
7. MacNamara, JS (ed): The Privatization Revolution. Hillsdale, Michigan, Hillsdale College Press, 1987.Google Scholar
8. Savas, ES: Alternatives for Delivering Public Services. Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press, 1977.Google Scholar
9. Heffron, F: Organization Theory and Public Organizations. Englewood, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1989.Google Scholar
10. Ross, R: Government and the Private Sector: Who Should Do What. New York, Crane Russak and Company, 1988.Google Scholar
11. Goodman, JC, Privatization. Dallas, Texas, National Center for Policy Analysis, 1985.Google Scholar
12. Hanke, SH (ed): Prospects for Privatization. New York, Academy of Political Science, 1987.Google Scholar
13. Finely, L (ed): Public Sector Privatization. New York, Quorum Books, 1989Google Scholar
14. Cleary, R, Henry, N, and Associates: Managing Public Programs: Balancing Politics, Administration and Public Needs. San Francisco, California, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1989.Google Scholar
15. Chapa, J: Rebuilding public trust: The vital role of nonprofessional public servants, In: Thompson, F (ed), Revitalizing State and Local Public Service. San Francisco, California, Jossey-Bass, 1993.Google Scholar
16. Kettl, D: The Myths, realities, and challenges of privatization. In: Thompson, F (ed), Revitalizing State and Local Public Service, San Francisco, California, Jossey-Bass, 1993.Google Scholar
17. Barzelay, M: Breaking Through Bureaucracy, Berkeley, California, University of California Press, 1992.Google Scholar
18. Privatization in America: An Opinion Survey of City and County Governments on Their Use of Privatization and Their Infrastructure Needs, Washington DC, Touche-Ross and Co. 1987.Google Scholar
19. Kemp, RL: Privatization, Jefferson, North Carolina, McFarland and Co., 1991.Google Scholar
20. Stout, J: System Design. In: Kuehl, A, (ed). Prehospital Systems and Medical Oversight. St. Louis, Missouri, Mosby Lifeline, 1994.Google Scholar
21. Drake, L, Thompson, M: System design and human resources. In: Cleary, V, Wilson, P, Super, G (eds), PreHospital Care: Administrative and Clinical Management, Rockville, Maryland, Aspen Publishers, 1987.Google Scholar
22. Polsky, SS: Continuous Quality Improvement in EMS. Dallas, Texas, American College of Emergency Physicians, 1992.Google Scholar
23. Stout, J: The public/private interface. Journal of Emergency Medical Services, July 1983;7:54–62.Google Scholar
24. Fowler, RL: System Models. In: Kuehl, A (ed). Prehospital Systems and Medical Oversight, St. Louis, Missouri, Mosby Lifeline, 1994.Google Scholar
25. Armington, RQ, Ellis, W, (eds): This Way Up: The Local Official's Handbook for Privatization and Contracting Out, Chicago, Regnery Gateway, 1984.Google Scholar
26. Cady, G, Scott, T: EMS in the United States: 1995 survey of providers in the 200 most populous cities. Journal of Emergency Medical Services, 1995;20:76–99.Google ScholarPubMed