Intelligent Sustainment and Renewal of Department of Energy Facilities and Infrastructure (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Infrastructure Management Performance Measures
4 Infrastructure Management Performance Measures
Pages 48-78
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 48... ...
-- Albert Einstein INTRODUCTION Industry and management gurus have long espoused the importance of performance measures to achieving management objectives. Like the instruments in an airplane cockpit, measures are needed for managers to know the effect of decisions on the direction and rate of change in performance.
|
From page 49... ...
Some of these models specifically address the performance of facilities, while others address broader facilities management issues and process improvement. Although no single entity presented a model that was completely applicable to DOE, components of these models appear appropriate for consideration in an integrated management approach for DOE.
|
From page 50... ...
SAM is derived from two widely accepted systems for continuous process improvement: the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and the "balanced scorecard" (BSC)
|
From page 51... ...
The Strategic Assessment Model uses elements of the balanced scorecard approach to integrate both financial and nonfinancial measures both to show a clear linkage between facilities and organizational goals and strategies, and to assess successful facilities management across organizations. Under this concept, goals become the road map to the desired outcomes.
|
From page 52... ...
Navy Shore Installation Management Balanced Scorecard The Navy has developed a system for shore installation management (SIM) based on a balanced scorecard approach.
|
From page 53... ...
Although APPA and the Navy both use multiple-metric BSC systems to evaluate performance and support management decisions, their objectives and approaches vary. There is no single example that the committee can recommend for DOE to follow; however, the committee notes that DOE needs to expand the number of metrics it uses and ensure their consistent use throughout the department and that these metrics should be coordinated and verifiable to support F&I management decisions at all levels.
|
From page 54... ...
C-Ratings (Readiness) : Relationship of the quantitative and qualitative rat ings to mission readiness FRM is expressed as the number of years it would take to regenerate a physical plant and is calculated as the ratio of the value of assets (i.e., replacement plant value)
|
From page 55... ...
Coast Guard (USCG) Office of Civil Engineering has developed a suite of performance metrics to provide information needed to support shore facility capital asset management decisions (Dempsey, 2003)
|
From page 56... ...
DOE METRICS Chapter 3 discussed DOE performance metrics in terms of their application to planning and budgeting decisions. This section discusses these metrics in comparison to a set of preferred characteristics for performance metrics and management systems.
|
From page 57... ...
In practice, as might be expected, most of the available assessments are fairly explicit about the input measures, less explicit about the process measures, and somewhat fragmentary about the outcome measures. The fourth set of evaluation measures, systemic measures, can be regarded as impact measures, but they have generally been overlooked in the evaluation literature.
|
From page 58... ...
-- REFLECTS NEAR TERM IMPACT) · Occupant attitudes · Occupant behaviors · Contribution to achieving current and future program/site/DOE goals · Contribution to achieving current and future program/site/DOE mission · Contribution to achieving current and future program/site/DOE vision · Facility availability SYSTEMIC MEASURES (WHY?
|
From page 59... ...
, as well as serving to support critical decisions concerning performance evaluation, performance prediction, budget planning, budget allocation, life-cycle cost analysis, and location and construction of new mission-oriented laboratories. DOE Department-Wide Metrics DOE's Real Property Asset Management (Order O 430.1B)
|
From page 60... ...
, where FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance to replacement plant value (RPV) ." · Departmental planning guidance sets a maintenance funding target at a minimum of 2 percent of RPV.
|
From page 61... ...
It would have been more beneficial to DOE's objectives if a hazardous building on the same campus were cleaned up and demolished, even though the comparable expenditure would not have yielded an equivalent square footage. If the intent of the requirement is to reduce DOE's inventory of excess real property assets and improve the department's facilities, the committee hopes that Congress will revise its requirement to address decontamination and demolition by measuring the equivalent dollar value of repair, replacement, demolition, and cleanup to be undertaken if a new facility is to be constructed.
|
From page 62... ...
INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT APPROACH As indicated earlier in this chapter, it is important to select performance measures that provide for an assessment of how the program or system is performing, support management decisions, and provide the basis for continuing improvement of the program. The facilities management system (FMS)
|
From page 63... ...
Metrics Four metrics are considered: asset condition index (ACI) , mission condition index (MCI)
|
From page 64... ...
Data FIMS CAIS FIGURE 4-1 An integrated management approach for DOE facilities and infrastructure. Most of the data for these metrics are derived from data that have already been collected and that are available in the FIMS and/or CAIS databases.
|
From page 65... ...
Assuming that all the w weights range from 0 to 1 (i.e., similar to the TABLE 4-1 Determining Mission Condition and Effectiveness Adjustment Factors Degree That a Facility Supports a Mission or Sub-mission k, Mission Condition Adjustment Factor or Mission Condition Mission Effectiveness w(smm) , Mission Effectiveness Factor Excellent Critical 0.80 ~ 1.00 Good Essential 0.60 ~ 0.79 Fair Necessary 0.40 ~ 0.59 Poor Optional 0.20 ~ 0.39 Very Poor Expendable 0.00 ~ 0.19
|
From page 66... ...
. Determining Mission Condition Index and Mission Effectiveness Index Adjustment Factors DOE will need to develop a process for determining the MCI and ME factors that is consistent throughout the department.
|
From page 67... ...
construct for department-level planning and budgeting decisions. The proposed FMS considers five facility-level decisions: performance evaluation, performance prediction, project prioritization, budget planning, and budget allocation.
|
From page 68... ...
Impact of Renewals FIGURE 4-2 Impact of maintenance and renewals on the asset condition index.
|
From page 69... ...
An Example Application of an Integrated Facility Management System The purpose of this hypothetical example is to illustrate how the integrated management approach might be applied in a static manner. When the time variable
|
From page 70... ...
, the initial mission condition adjustment factor for facility f to the mission m, by employing Table 4-1.
|
From page 71... ...
Building 4.451+ e0.04143 35 (See Step 5 of Table 4-4 for the ACI of the other buildings in the hypothetical example.)
|
From page 72... ...
, their corresponding adjustment factors ks(f, m) , and their corresponding asset condition indices, ACIs(f)
|
From page 73... ...
. The following management decisions for the five buildings are considered based on the hypothetical data.
|
From page 74... ...
Performance Prediction As indicated in Step 5, and illustrated in Figure 4-3, the facility deterioration curve is applied to the four types of facilities that are included in this example. Project Prioritization The five facility renewal projects can be prioritized based on the cost-effectiveness values calculated in Table 4-4.
|
From page 75... ...
The critical question that must be answered is whether a facility and its related infrastructure support a critical DOE mission. The answer to this question can help determine the k factor used in the integrated facility management model discussed above and serve as the starting point for the decision-making process illustrated in Figure 4-4.
|
From page 76... ...
76 monitor and Sustain to facility Relocate replacement Yes Yes feasible? No or relocation Refurbish Recapitalize Is Yes Yes to s' than be facilities other cost?
|
From page 77... ...
The current metrics defined by RPAM are inadequate for the size and complexity of DOE's facilities. The committee has identified metrics that have been successfully used by other organizations (the Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers' Strategic Assessment Model, the Navy's balanced scorecard approach, the Department of Defense sustainment and recapitalization model, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's full cost management model, and the U.S.
|
From page 78... ...
U.S. Coast Guard Shore Facility Capital Asset Management.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.