An Expected Value Comparative Analysis Study on First Responder and Fire Protection Policies, Services, and Products in the United States

The present study conducted expected value analysis on 12 fire protection policies, services, and products in the United States. The cost of the policy, product, or service was compared with the expected benefit (value), which was determined by multiplying the payoff amount with probability. Cost benefit analysis was used on eight fire protection products, policies or services, and cost effective analysis was used on four fire protection products, policies, or services. Three fire protection products, policies, or services (fire resistance construction materials, volunteer fire departments, and fire extinguishers) were found to be cost beneficial while five fire protection products, policies, or services (emergency medical memberships, fire sprinkler systems, fire alarms, fire insurance and fire department medical calls), were not. Expected value equations show that fire protection for the most part does not provide economic value, yet the industry is protected by fire protection requirement laws. Cost effective analysis was used to determine cost per life saved for paramedic care, automated external defibrillators, helicopter emergency medical services, and smoke alarms. Paramedic care was found to be most cost effective, followed by automated external defibrillators, helicopter emergency medical services, and smoke alarms.