Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Facility management
- Creators: Chalmers, Jeffrey
- Creators: Chong, Oswald
- Resource Type: Text
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
The performance of the Alpha Sprayed Polyurethane Foam (SPF) roofing system is perceived as not an economical option when compared to a 20-year modified bitumen roofing system. Today, the majority of roofs are being replaced, rather than newly installed. The coating manufacturer, Neogard, implemented the Alpha roofing program to identify the best contractors in the industry and to measure their roof performance. The Alpha roof system has shown consistent high performance on over 230 million square feet of surveyed roof. The author proposes to identify if the Alpha roof system is renewable, has proven performance that competes with the traditional modified roofing system, and is a more economical option by evaluating an Alpha roof system installation and the performance of a 29-year-old Alpha roof system. The Dallas Independent School District utilized the Alpha program for William Lipscomb Elementary School in 2016. Dallas Fort Worth Urethane installed the Alpha SPF roof system with high customer satisfaction ratings. This roofing installation showed the value of the Alpha roof system by saving over 20% on costs for the installation and will save approximately 69% of costs on the recoating of the roof in 20 years. The Casa View Elementary School roof system was installed with a Neogard Permathane roof system in 1987. This roof was hail tested with ten drops from 17 feet 9 inches of 1-3/4-inch steel ball (9 out of 10 passed) and four drops from 17 feet 9 inches with a 3-inch diameter steel ball (2 out of 4 passed). The analysis of the passing and failing core samples show that the thickness of the top and base Alpha SPF coating is one of the major differences in a roof passing or failing the FM-SH hail test. Over the 40-year service life, the main difference of purchasing a 61,000 square feet Alpha SPF roof versus modified bitumen roof are savings of approximately $1,067,500. Past hail tests on Alpha SPF roof systems show its cost effectiveness with high customer satisfaction (9.8 out of 10), an over 40-year service life after a $6.00/SF recoat and savings of over $1M for DISD.
ContributorsZulanas, Charles J., IV (Author) / Kashiwagi, Dean T. (Thesis advisor) / Kashiwagi, Jacob S (Thesis advisor) / Chong, Oswald (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