Provider No.: A197
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment
for Facility Renewal Planning
Samir Patel - Director of Operation & Maintenance
Walter Castillo - Principal Project Manager
Date: 09/22/2018
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 1
Credit(s) earned on completion of this
course will be reported to AIA CES for
AIA members. Certificates of Completion
for both AIA members and non-AIA
members are available upon request.
This course is registered with AIA CES
for continuing professional education. As
such, it does not include content that may
be deemed or construed to be an approval
or endorsement by the AIA of any
material of construction or any method or
manner of
handling, using, distributing, or dealing in
any material or product._______________________________________
Questions related to specific materials, methods, and
services will be addressed at the conclusion of this
presentation.
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 2
The Facility Renewal Program (FRP) was created
to prioritize infrastructure and aesthetic conditions
needs for strategic renewal and replacement. The
FRP was designed to capitalize on the
knowledge base of in-house facilities staff and
the expertise of our Facility Condition
Assessment (FCA) consultant. This program
includes identification of existing and anticipated
lifecycle infrastructure deficiencies in addition to
aesthetic renewal projects. The consolidation of
information from various sources into a single
program has allowed the facilities division to make
improved decisions on project prioritization and
resource allocations. It will also provide a platform
to substantiate future infrastructure requirements
and funding needs. An effective program will not
only operationally extend the life of MD
Anderson Cancer Center facilities but also
minimize disruption in space utilization and
equipment downtime.
Course
Description
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 3
Learning
Objectives
1. Analysis - Emphasis on the type of analysis that should take
place when prioritizing facilities needs.
2. Planning - Learn how to build the components of a facilities
renewal program and allow for recalibration as institutional
goals change.
3. Formulate - Based on institutional objectives and relevant
facilities data a complete facility renewal plan can be
prepared.
4. Implement - Execute and measure the plan effectiveness.
At the end of the this course, participants will be able to:
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 4
MD Anderson
Contents
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 5
1 STATE OF AFFAIRS
2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
3 EXECUTION OF PLAN
4 FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
MD Anderson
Facility Renewal Program - To define a process that
enables MD Anderson Facilities to assess, identify,
and prioritize infrastructure and aesthetic conditions
for strategic renewal and replacement on a multi-
year cycle.
6Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
MD Anderson 7Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
STATE OF AFFAIRS
MD Anderson
Current State
8Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
0115 Million Gross Square Feet
023 Mission areas 5 Campuses
Administrative, Research, and Patient Care Buildings
03 140+ Buildings
Includes all spaces managed by MDACC.
Space Data
MD Anderson
Current State
9Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
61 Buildings
(age 15 - 35 years)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 75-80
Num
ber
of
Buil
din
gs
Age of Building
Number of Buildings by Age
Administrative Research Patient Care
In 10 years - 72 Buildings
(age 15-35 years)
MD Anderson
In 10 Years
10Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
5,000,0001
0-1
4
15-1
9
20-2
4
25
-29
30-3
4
35-3
9
40-4
4
45-4
9
50-5
4
55-5
9
60-6
4
75-8
0
81-8
5
86-9
0
Gro
ss S
quar
e F
eet
Age Range (years)
Smithville
Houston - South Campus
Houston - Off Campus
Houston - North Campus
Houston - Mid Campus
Houston - East Campus
Bastrop
11.2 million ft2
(aged 15 - 35 years)
Buildings Under 10 – Low RiskLittle work. “Honeymoon” period.
Buildings 10 to 25 – Medium RiskShort life-cycle needs; primarily space renewal.
Buildings 25 to 50 – Higher RiskMajor envelope and mechanical life cycles come due.
Buildings over 50 – Highest RiskLife cycles of major building components are past
due. Failures are possible.
MD Anderson
GSF and Work Orders
11Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Num
ber
of
Wo
rk O
rder
s
Gro
ss S
quar
e F
eet
Axis Title
GSF W.O.
MD Anderson
Facility Management’s Pain Points
12Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Instability in Budget
Process
Budget was difficult
to project and was
volatile.
Reactive Approach
React to equipment to failure
or next big emergency.
Lack of Resource
Planning
Difficult to plan for human
resource needs.
Conflicting
Priorities
Various projects with
inconsistent alignment to
institutional objectives.
MD Anderson 13Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
MD Anderson
Program Development - Objectives
14Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Stewardship
Facility stewardship as
a core value.
Evolve
Management processes
need to evolve.
AestheticsModernize existing
spaces.
Efficiency
Efficiently utilize
resources.
Proactive
Strategically forecast
future funding needs.
FCA.
Prioritize
Have a means to
target critical needs
and systems.
Performance
Data driven. Monitor
and track
performance.
MD Anderson
Program Development - Stakeholders
15Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
Engineering
EH&S
Front Line Staff
LEADERSHIP
CONSULTANTS
Master Planning,
Engineering Studies, FCA
CLINICAL & ACADEMIC
STAFF
Faculty
Nurse Managers
CAD’s
Professors
Researcher Leadership
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Project Managers
Project Data Personnel
SPACE PLANNING
Aesthetics
Master Planning
Commitment from all levels
on program development and
execution.
MD Anderson
Facilities Renewal Components
16Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
FCA
O&M
Aesthetics
Project
Management
O&M
Issues identified by
O&M and other
operational groups.
Aesthetics
Aesthetically refresh
spaces, surveys,
furniture
FCA
Facilities Condition
Assessment
MD Anderson
Facility Condition Assessment
17Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
FCA Components
• Scope of work
• Data required for FCA
• Process for conducting an FCA
• Milestones and timeline
• Taking action on FCA report
• Pilot FCA
• Lessons Learned
FCA
O&M
Aesthetics
Project
Management
MD Anderson
FCA Data Requirements
18Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Space Data
Facility Condition
Assessment
Asset Inventory
Work Order History
Project History
Future Projects
Drawings
Field Survey
&
Interviews
MD Anderson
Aesthetics Renewal
19Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Aesthetics Components
• Aesthetics renewal
assessment process
• Process to utilize project
database for aesthetics
• Established frequency of
assessments based on
space type
• Developed a matrix to
evaluate aesthetics
FCA
O&M
Aesthetics
Project
Management
MD Anderson
Aesthetics Renewal Condition Assessment
20Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Building: building name Assessed by:Team Participants By
Area: zone / clinic or dept name Date: date By Item Category
Level: floor level %
Art/Installations Includes: Displays, Art Program pieces, Wayfinding, Exhibits, Kiosks, Monuments/Plaques, Statues/Busts, etc. 5%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Missing artwork, space needs artwork, no asset tag, crooked, inaccurate, dirty 33.3
Repair 3 Minor scratches, torn fabric, damaged base, moderate surface damage, chipped edges, marred 66.6
Replace 4 Cracked glass, broken/chipped frames, outdated standard, no longer relevant, 100
Ceilings Includes: hard, tile/grid, fabric, metal, suspended/specialty. Also, building systems: speaker, life safety, sensor, HVAC 10%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Not significant damage or modification needed for project consideration, but needs attention 33.3
Repair 3 One or more components have damage or need repairs 66.6
Replace 4 More than 2 ceiling surfaces or greater than 1/3 of single component are visibly damaged or detracting 100
Doors Includes: sliding, automatic, laminate, hollow metal, 10%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Inoperable or missing closer, paint touch up, dirty, 33.3
Repair 3 Chipped laminate, damaged kick plates, damage indicates adding door protection 66.6
Replace 4 Door doesn't fit frame, thresholds damaged to be safety hazard, H/W difficult to operate, cracked glass, overall poor condition 100
Floors/Base Includes: rolled carpet, carpet tiles, vinyl tiles, rolled vinyl, concrete, terrazzo, ceramic tile 15%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Loose, snagged, damaged base, dirty but cleanable, threshold, mismatched pattern, single seams 33.3
Repair 3 Intersections or bordering areas mismatched, product appearance or sections need attention, minor grout issues 66.6
Replace 4 100
Furnishings Includes: Public/Patient area furnishings, podiums, reception/information/security custom builts, institution accessories 20%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Dirty/soiled piece, layout incorrect, hallway obstructions, simple wood repair (sand/touch up finish) 33.3
Repair 3 Stains on several pieces, cushions deteriorating, worn upholstery, refinish wood, functional feature malfunctions 66.6
Replace 4 Broken frames, unleveled pieces, bent metal frames, pattern to upholstery wear/tears/stains, layout doesn’t support area 100
Lighting 5%
Great - No Action 1 0
Exists/Work Order 2 Bulbs out, switch plate cracked, loose fixture, cobwebs/dust, sensor not working 33.3
Repair 3 Noisy fixtures, electrical reactions, (MEP assessment will know technical issues) 66.6
Replace 4 Pattern of consistent wear, discoloration, does not function for space, obsolete fixtures 100
Millwork Includes: custom built, installed pieces and their openings, backsplashes, doors, drawers, hardware, top surfaces 15%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Dirty, marks, loose hardware 33.3
Repair 3 Significant issue with hardware, mismatched finishes in space, scratches, missing caulk, feature issues 66.6
Replace 4 Missing/chipped laminate or hard surface, cracks, feature broken/inoperable 100
Walls 15%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 Less than 3 patch/paint items, wall protection needs repair or dirty, stains, hanging accessories non-compliant 33.3
Repair 3 Patch/paint on >3 or more walls, consistent damage or non-compliant accessories, vinyl tears/holes, visual clutter/life safety, 66.6
Replace 4 Water damage apparent, surface damaged beyond repair, accessories obsolete, surface non-compliant for area use 100
Window Treatment 5%
Great - No Action 1 0
Minor Infractions 2 broken chain, treatment dirty, window glass dirty or frame/mullion dirty, wand broken 33.3
Repair 3 66.6
Replace 4 No longer appropriate for space, new standard, more than 1/4 damaged/inoperable or 1/4 applied mat'l damaged 100
PRIORITIZATION
SCORE 100%
Mat'l non-compliant with use, significant wear, stains, broken tiles, missing/stained grout, tears/seams in vinyl, scratched
or chipped terrazzo/ceramic tile
Electrical systems won't sync, shades removed/down, crooked on roller, jammed, blackout/overlay issues,
tears/mismatched seams on applies mat'l
MD Anderson
Operations and Maintenance
21Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
O&M Components
• Process to handle the needs from
operational groups
• Developed Matrix for evaluating
requests or deficiencies
• Method to track O&M needs and
engineering assessments
• Utilize asset data for decision
making
FCA
O&M
Aesthetics
Project
Management
MD Anderson
Evaluation Matrix Criteria
22Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
SAFETY
REGULATORY – CODE COMPLIANCE
OPERATIONAL IMPACT
EUL
ROI
AREA IMPACTED
MD Anderson
Prioritization
23Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Utilized to effectively score competing
priorities for available fundingDate: 6-Oct-16 Task No: 18023
Evaluator Steve Suter Task Name: Exhaust System for G12 Rooms Not in Compliance with ASHRAE
Safety 3
1
2
3
Regulatory 4
1
2
3
4
Operational
Impact 3
1
2
3
4
End of Life 4
1
2
3
4
Return on
Investment (ROI)1
1
2
3
Area Impacted or
Served4
1
2
3
4
Prioritization
Score 89
Direct patient care and mission critical space (i.e. waiting room, exam room, OR, vivarium, Data Center)
N/A. Zero years or 5+ year payback
3-5 year payback
< 3 years payback
Unoccupied space (i.e. mechanical space, vacated space)
Administrative space
General research or clinical support space
Should be corrected within 5+ years inorder to maintain integrity of the facility.
Should be corrected within 3-5 years inorder to maintain integrity of the facility.
At end of life but is fully or mostly operational. Should be corrected within 1-2 years inorder to maintain integrity
of the facility.
Not operational. Discountinued / Obsolete. Product/system is no longer available or supported or no longer
services it's intended purpose.
No direct impact to site operations. Equipment is supported with redundancy and redundant equipment is
operational.
Localized level, often restricted to a localized system or a specific floor/room location .
No significant effects or disruption of facility operations
Building level, often restricted to a building system.
Minor effects or disruption of facility operations, but effects anticpated as temporary with necessary
Institutional level, restricting critical communication systems. Major effects or disruption of critical facility and
operations. Functional obsolescence - the inability to support new technology, equipment or process for
clinical/research operations.
None
Institutional Standards, as defined in MDA Owner Design Guideline Elements and others.
Code Modifications, upcoming code changes as dictated by an organization body with a compliance date issued.
Examples include items that do not conorm to existing codes, which are "grandfathered" in their existing
condition and may require renovation in the future to correct.
Regulatory or Code violation/deficiency. Examples inlucde NFPA, AAALAC, Joint Commission, GMP, USP797.
CRR/FRM
Facilities Renewal Prioritization Matrix
<---Select the number that best fits the task as noted in each category
No risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Indirect risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Direct risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Safety 3
1
2
3
Regulatory 4
1
2
3
4
None
Institutional Standards, as defined in MDA Owner Design Guideline Elements and others.
Code Modifications, upcoming code changes as dictated by an organization body with a compliance date issued.
Examples include items that do not conorm to existing codes, which are "grandfathered" in their existing
condition and may require renovation in the future to correct.
Regulatory or Code violation/deficiency. Examples inlucde NFPA, AAALAC, Joint Commission, GMP, USP797.
<---Select the number that best fits the task as noted in each category
No risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Indirect risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Direct risk of harm, injury or loss of individuals, animals and/or property
Operational
Impact 3
1
2
3
4
End of Life 4
1
2
3
4
Should be corrected within 5+ years inorder to maintain integrity of the facility.
Should be corrected within 3-5 years inorder to maintain integrity of the facility.
At end of life but is fully or mostly operational. Should be corrected within 1-2 years inorder to maintain integrity
of the facility.
Not operational. Discountinued / Obsolete. Product/system is no longer available or supported or no longer
services it's intended purpose.
No direct impact to site operations. Equipment is supported with redundancy and redundant equipment is
operational.
Localized level, often restricted to a localized system or a specific floor/room location .
No significant effects or disruption of facility operations
Building level, often restricted to a building system.
Minor effects or disruption of facility operations, but effects anticpated as temporary with necessary
Institutional level, restricting critical communication systems. Major effects or disruption of critical facility and
operations. Functional obsolescence - the inability to support new technology, equipment or process for
clinical/research operations.
Return on
Investment (ROI)1
1
2
3
Area Impacted or
Served4
1
2
3
4
Prioritization
Score 89
Direct patient care and mission critical space (i.e. waiting room, exam room, OR, vivarium, Data Center)
N/A. Zero years or 5+ year payback
3-5 year payback
< 3 years payback
Unoccupied space (i.e. mechanical space, vacated space)
Administrative space
General research or clinical support space
MD Anderson 24Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Project Management
Project database
• Intake method for aesthetics,
FCA deficiencies, O&M capital
needs
• Identify method to track future
projects
FCA
O&M
Aesthetics
Project
Management
MD Anderson 25Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
EXECUTION OF PLAN
MD Anderson
Execution of Plan
26Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Project ScoringFacility Condition
Assessment (FCA)Budget/Project Analysis Execution Plan
• Every project is scored on
a 100 pt. scale
• Projects range between
MEP infrastructure,
Aesthetic, EH&S and
Energy Efficient needs
• Study provides
recommended immediate
“Do Now” and life-cycle
needs w/ respective
budgets
• Validate annual needs of
report and insert request
into Facility Renewal
Database
• Validate project intentions
(scope & budget)
• Normalize project scores
between mission groups
• Create Sensitivity Model
• Project ranks & efficient
frontiers
• Carry-over cost analysis
• Provides a roadmap on
how projects will be rolled
out throughout the FY
• Set expectations upfront –
Validated list of projects,
kick-off dates, high-level
schedule, Int./Ext. AE
resources, PM resources
Providing a level playing
field across different O&M
MGMT teams
Complements O&M
internal generated projects
and provides a baseline
need per building
Drive recommendations by
leveraging Data
Roadmap to a successful
project year
MD Anderson
Annual Budget Exercise
27Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
9/1/2018 9/30/201910/1/2018 11/1/2018 12/1/2018 1/1/2019 2/1/2019 3/1/2019 4/1/2019 5/1/2019 6/1/2019 7/1/2019 8/1/2019 9/1/2019
2/1/2019 - 7/1/20199/1/2019
New FY
3/3/2019
Milestone Description 4/2/2019
Milestone Description
5/2/2019
Milestone Description
6/1/2019
Milestone DescriptionBu
Budget
Iteration
1
Budget
Iteration
2
Budget
Iteration
3
Final
Budget
February – June (Budget Exercise for next Fiscal Year)
September
(New Fiscal Year)
September
(Active Fiscal Year)
Working on Active Projects
Budget Iteration Process is a Transparent Process where each Stakeholder
understands their Peer Needs (Project & Financial Based)
• O&M Directors
• Owner’s Engineers
• Project MGMT
• Aesthetic Renewal Team
Stakeholders
MD Anderson
Facility Condition Assessments
28Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Building ‘A’
Feeds Project
Candidates for
a given FY
(Supplements O&M
operational needs)
Per Assessment - Leverage Both Immediate & General Life Cycle Needs
MD Anderson
Budget Analysis
29Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Data analysis allows transparency
and fair educated decisions among
the various FM stakeholders with
how the project portfolio is being
put together
Inst
ituti
onal
Pro
ject
Val
ue
Accumulative Project Cost
More Cost/ Less ValueOptimal Project Portfolio
Projects
Fin
al E
stim
ate
Matrix Scores
# o
f P
roje
cts
# o
f P
roje
cts
Matrix Scores Matrix Scores
Group ‘A’ Group ‘B’
MD Anderson
Baseline Actuals
Execution Plan – Project Portfolio Sub-set
30Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
FundToDate SpendToDate
Active Fiscal Year Next Fiscal YearActive Fiscal Year
Q1 Q2
# of Kick-Offs
per Month
• Strategic kick-off dates
• Establish PM Resources upfront per current
workload & strengths
• Create project schedule templates (6, 12, 18
months)
• Establish internal/external Design resources
• Monitor financial trends for a sub-set of projects
FY Project Loading
FY Project Finance Trend
Co
unt
# o
f P
roje
cts
$
MD Anderson
Execution Plan - Project Portfolio Sub-set
31Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Mar-18 Apr-18 May-18 Jun-18 Jul-18 Aug-18
Original Cumulative Forecast Cumulative Reforecast High Visibility Cumulative
Analyze top projected expenditure projects for the fiscal year
Spread between
original & cumulative
forecast
Spread between cumulative forecast
& high visibility actuals ; Positive Correlation
$ i
n m
illi
ons
High Visibility projects are
pre-selected at beginning
of the FY
MD Anderson
Project Portfolio Spend Forecasting
32Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 2 3 4
Monthly Actuals Cumulative Actuals
Dynamic
Forecasting
provides an
opportunity to
anticipate
future variance
needs
Evolving model (s-curve driven) that takes into account various project lengths and
Design Intent (internal vs. external resources)
M1 M2 M3 M4
$ i
n m
illi
ons
MD Anderson 33Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
MD Anderson
Capital Budget/Actuals Trend
34Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
-35%
-18%
-44%
-60%
-81%
-46%
-24%
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
Facility Renewal
Program Starts
FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY181
• Capital budget variance (%)
performance has improved
since the start of the Facility
Renewal Program
• Learning curve continues
• Streamline Sourcing &
Contract processes
Downward trends w/
respect to capital budget
portfolio since FY13
AA
B
B
Note: % Change = Actuals vs. Budgets 1FY18 = Reflects up to July 2018
MD Anderson
Future Improvements – Lessons Learned
35Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Challenge Details
Strategy/Plan will change throughout the
year
1. Weather and Organizational Changes will impact a given year’s project portfolio plan.
Be flexible and adjust resources as needed to manage the plan.
2. Priorities & Emergencies that were not “Planned” work will cause the plan to shift
Data is just Data ; Still need to enforce
the plan
1. Communicating project portfolio progress to executives is important, but more
importantly is to communicate w/ staff (see the big picture)
2. Don’t assume that a project being in the correct stage also translates to it is progressing
Predicting ramp rate of construction
spend
1. For a given sub-set of projects that started in the same FY, it takes time to see significant
construction dollars being expensed
2. Important to improve upfront project documentation throughput time
3. Avoid Design Stage stagnation
4. Competitive Sealed Proposal’s Lag Time
Coordinating w/ other parallel initiatives
1. Take advantage of other active projects that are leveraging the same space use ; minimize
multiple disruptions to customer
2. Take advantage of future projects that will leverage the same space and have more
complexity to it
Integrate better both aesthetic renewal
and infrastructure needs
1. Invest in “Patient Experience”
2. The book does get judge by its cover
MD Anderson
Future Enhancements – Building Blocks of Culture Change
36Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning
Leadership
CommitmentManage Align
Clarify the
Problem
Develop
Talent and
Skills
• Getting Executive
approval of process is
important for buy-in
• Leverage Executive
MGMT support to
remove process barriers
• It is more than just
an idea, it is a managed
process
• Show structure to the
program w/ expected
accountability
• Share latest data trends
to both MGMT and staff
• Align strategy to
staff’s workload
• Help staff understand
the “Big Picture”
• Build on strengths
to deliver quick wins,
but also develop to
have more resource
capacity
• Not 100% Project
MGMT matrix team
(reduce volatility
workload)
• Make sure staff/MGMT understand
the problem it is trying to solve
(i.e. continued budget
shortfalls = less projects)
• Make sure staff understands how
they are part of the solution
MD Anderson
This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing
Education Systems Course
Please take a moment to complete the evaluation form.
Provider Name/Logo
Theresa Bartos Drewell, AIA
806-790-1987
Leveraging Data and Strategic Alignment for Facility Renewal Planning 37
Top Related