Resident urges commissioners to explain TEAS ambulance response times and county support

Justin Kendall, a Lafayette resident, told the Tippecanoe County Board of Commissioners during public comment that he has reviewed state dispatch data and concluded the county’s ambulance contractor, TEAS (operated by Franciscan), is not meeting expected response standards.

"TEAS is only on scene within 8 minutes about 62% of the time, not 90% of the time," Kendall said, citing performance data he reviewed from the state management performance hub. He added that "90% of calls that TEAS takes are answered within 13 minutes rather than 8 minutes." Kendall said some months briefly improved after ambulance-placement changes in February 2025 but that most months remain near 60% on-time for the 8-minute target.

Kendall also raised concerns about staffing and cost: he said TEAS pays less than neighboring counties’ EMS providers, has higher workload, and that county residents are charged "up to 50% more" for ambulance service than fire-department–run EMS for similar responses. He urged the board to explain "what the current expectations are that have been communicated to Franciscan for TEAS regarding response times" and to make yearly operational audits publicly available on the county website rather than requiring public-records requests.

County officials did not provide an immediate response or new operational figures during the meeting. Kendall asked commissioners to explain what Franciscan has told them about response performance and to disclose any county funds that support TEAS beyond the $100,000 in EDIT funds he referenced.

Why it matters: Ambulance response times and funding have direct public-safety and budget consequences. If validated, the performance and cost differences Kendall described could prompt policy review of the county’s contract structure, placement strategy, or subsidy levels.

What happened next: Commissioners acknowledged the comment and invited Kendall to sign in; the meeting then continued to other agenda items. No formal motion or staff report responding to Kendall’s data was presented at this meeting.

Sources and provenance: Kendall’s statements and the numerical claims above were made during public comment (SEG 446–SEG 560).