Matching Items (1)
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