Matching Items (4)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Facility management
- All Subjects: BIM Education
- Creators: Ayer, Steven K
- Creators: Chalmers, Jeffrey
Description
Public institution facility operations and maintenance is a significant factor enabling an institution to achieve its stated objectives in the delivery of public service. To meet the societal need, Facility Directors must make increasingly complex decisions managing the demands of building infrastructure performance expectations with limited resources. The ability to effectively measure a return-on-investment, specific to facility maintenance indirect expenditures, has, therefore, become progressively more critical given the scale of public institutions, the collective age of existing facilities, and the role these institutions play in society.
This research centers on understanding the method of prioritizing routine work in support of indirect institutional facility maintenance expense through the lens of K-12 public education in the state of Arizona. The methodology documented herein utilizes a mixed method approach to understand current facility maintenance practices and assess the influence of human behavior when prioritizing routine work. An evidence-based decision support tool, leveraging prior academic research, was developed to coalesce previously disparate academic studies. The resulting process provides a decision framework for prioritizing decision factors most frequently correlated with academic outcomes.
A purposeful sample of K-12 unified districts, representing approximately one-third of the state’s student population and spend, resulted in a moderate to a strong negative correlation between facility operations and student outcomes. Correlation results highlight an opportunity to improve decision making, specific to the academic needs of the student. This research documents a methodology for constructing, validation, and testing of a decision support tool for prioritizing routine work orders. Findings from a repeated measures crossover study suggest the decision support tool significantly influenced decision making specific to certain work orders as well as the Plumbing and Mechanical functional areas. However, the decision support tool was less effective when prioritizing Electrical and General Maintenance work orders.
Moreover, as decision making transitioned away from subjective experience-based judgment, the prioritization of work orders became increasingly more consistent. The resulting prioritization, therefore, effectively leveraged prior empirical, evidence-based decision factors when utilizing the tool. The results provide a system for balancing the practical experience of the Facility Director with the objective guidance of the decision support tool.
This research centers on understanding the method of prioritizing routine work in support of indirect institutional facility maintenance expense through the lens of K-12 public education in the state of Arizona. The methodology documented herein utilizes a mixed method approach to understand current facility maintenance practices and assess the influence of human behavior when prioritizing routine work. An evidence-based decision support tool, leveraging prior academic research, was developed to coalesce previously disparate academic studies. The resulting process provides a decision framework for prioritizing decision factors most frequently correlated with academic outcomes.
A purposeful sample of K-12 unified districts, representing approximately one-third of the state’s student population and spend, resulted in a moderate to a strong negative correlation between facility operations and student outcomes. Correlation results highlight an opportunity to improve decision making, specific to the academic needs of the student. This research documents a methodology for constructing, validation, and testing of a decision support tool for prioritizing routine work orders. Findings from a repeated measures crossover study suggest the decision support tool significantly influenced decision making specific to certain work orders as well as the Plumbing and Mechanical functional areas. However, the decision support tool was less effective when prioritizing Electrical and General Maintenance work orders.
Moreover, as decision making transitioned away from subjective experience-based judgment, the prioritization of work orders became increasingly more consistent. The resulting prioritization, therefore, effectively leveraged prior empirical, evidence-based decision factors when utilizing the tool. The results provide a system for balancing the practical experience of the Facility Director with the objective guidance of the decision support tool.
ContributorsBeauregard, Michael A. (Author) / Ayer, Steven K (Thesis advisor) / Laroche, Dominique-Claude (Committee member) / Gibson, Jr., G. Edward (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Standardized processes for training and accountability, for an Environmental Services department within a healthcare system, were implemented to see the impact they would have on key performance indicators (KPIs). The KPIs involved infection rate for hospital acquired Clostridium Difficile (CDI), cleaning verification compliance, patient satisfaction, concerning the cleaning of their environment, and employee turnover. The results show that standardizing training and an accountability measure can have a significant impact on turnover, contribute to the reduction in CDI cases, ensure cleaning is performed at a high level and that the patient perception requires additional tools to meet their expectations on a consistent basis.
ContributorsZiffer, Steven (Author) / Sullivan, Kenneth (Thesis advisor) / Smithwick, Jake (Committee member) / Lines, Brian (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
This research focuses on assessing the impact of various process mapping activities aimed at improving students' abilities to plan for Building Information Modeling (BIM). During the various educational activities, students were tasked with generating process maps to illustrate plans for hypothetical construction projects. Several different educational approaches for developing process maps were used, beginning in the Fall 2015 semester. In all iterations of the learning activity, students were asked to create level 1 (project-specific) and level 2 (BIM use-specific) process maps based on a previously published BIM Project Execution Planning Guide. In Fall 2015, a peer review activity was conducted. In Spring 2016, a collaborative activity was conducted. Beginning in the Fall 2016 and Spring 2017 semesters, an additional process mapping activity was conducted aimed at separating process mapping and BIM planning into separate activities. In Fall 2016, the BIM activity was conducted in groups of three whereas in Spring 2017, the students were asked to create individual process maps for the given BIM use. To understand the impact of the activity on students' perception of their own knowledge, a pre-and post-activity questionnaire was developed. It covered questions related to: (i) students' ability to create a process map, (ii) students' perception about the importance of a process map and (iii) students' perception about their own knowledge of the BIM execution process. The process maps were analyzed using a grading rubric developed by the author. The grading rubric is the major contribution of the work as there is no existing rubric to assess a BIM process map. The grading rubric divides each process map into five sections, including: core activity; activities preceding the core activity; activities following the core activity; loop/iteration; and communication across the swim lanes. The rubric consist of two parts that evaluate (i) the ability of students to demonstrate each section and (ii) the quality of demonstration of each section. The author conducted an inter-rater reliability index to validate the rubric. This inter-rater reliability index compares the scores students’ process maps were when assessed by graduate students, faculty, and industry practitioners. The reviewers graded the same set of twelve process maps. The inter-rater reliability index was found to be 0.21, which indicates a fair agreement between the graders. The non-BIM activity approach was perceived as the most impactful approach by the students. The assessment of the process maps with the rubric indicated that the non-BIM approach was the most impactful approach for enabling students to demonstrate their ability to create a process map.
ContributorsPerikamana, Aparna (Author) / Ayer, Steven K (Thesis advisor) / Chasey, Allan D (Committee member) / Parrish, Kristen D (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
ABSTRACT
Academic literature and industry benchmarking reports were reviewed to determine the way facilities benchmarking reports were perceived in the healthcare industry. Interviews were conducted through a Delphi panel of industry professionals who met experience and other credential requirements. Two separate rounds of interviewing were conducted where each candidate was asked the same questions to determine the current views of benchmarking reports and associated data in the healthcare industry. The questions asked in the second round were developed from the answers to the first-round questions. The research showed the panel preferred changes in the data collection methods as well as changes in the way the data is presented. The need for these changes was unanimous among the members of the panel. The main recommendations among the group were:
1. An interactive method such as a member portal with the ability to customize, run scenarios, and save data is the preferred method.
2. Facilities Management (FM) teams are often not included in the data collection of the benchmark reports. Including FM groups would allow more accuracy and more detailed data resulting in more accurate and in-depth reports.
3. More consistency and “apples to apples” comparisons need to be provided in the reports. More categories and variables need to be added to the reports to offer more in depth comparisons and assessments between buildings. Identifiers to help the users compare the physical condition of their facility to others needs to be included. Suggestions are as follows:
a. Facility Condition Index (FCI)- easily available to all participants and allows an idea of the comparison of upkeep and maintenance of their facility to that of others.
b. An indicator on whether the comparison buildings are Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) accredited.
4. Gross Square Footage (GSF) is not an accurate assessment on its own. Too many variables are left unidentified to offer an accurate assessment with this method alone.
Academic literature and industry benchmarking reports were reviewed to determine the way facilities benchmarking reports were perceived in the healthcare industry. Interviews were conducted through a Delphi panel of industry professionals who met experience and other credential requirements. Two separate rounds of interviewing were conducted where each candidate was asked the same questions to determine the current views of benchmarking reports and associated data in the healthcare industry. The questions asked in the second round were developed from the answers to the first-round questions. The research showed the panel preferred changes in the data collection methods as well as changes in the way the data is presented. The need for these changes was unanimous among the members of the panel. The main recommendations among the group were:
1. An interactive method such as a member portal with the ability to customize, run scenarios, and save data is the preferred method.
2. Facilities Management (FM) teams are often not included in the data collection of the benchmark reports. Including FM groups would allow more accuracy and more detailed data resulting in more accurate and in-depth reports.
3. More consistency and “apples to apples” comparisons need to be provided in the reports. More categories and variables need to be added to the reports to offer more in depth comparisons and assessments between buildings. Identifiers to help the users compare the physical condition of their facility to others needs to be included. Suggestions are as follows:
a. Facility Condition Index (FCI)- easily available to all participants and allows an idea of the comparison of upkeep and maintenance of their facility to that of others.
b. An indicator on whether the comparison buildings are Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) accredited.
4. Gross Square Footage (GSF) is not an accurate assessment on its own. Too many variables are left unidentified to offer an accurate assessment with this method alone.
ContributorsChalmers, Jeffrey (Author) / Sullivan, Kenneth (Thesis advisor) / Smithwick, Jake (Committee member) / Hurtado, Kristen (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020