Benchmarking and Performance Measurement Physical Plant

Overhead Photo

Overhead Photo

Labor Study – May 1995 26 people 8 people 2 people 6 people 19 people

The Continuous Improvement Process Dissatisfaction Who does Better? Why? Who Cares? Get Creative Try New Idea Evaluate Result What About? How Measured? Get Baseline Data What are we doing? Keep It or Trash ?

Pareto Chart of Non-Productive Time

Continuous Improvement Processes Reduction of travel time Materials acquisition Streamline workflow processes Customer satisfaction Minimizing response time Training program development Summer housing Reduction of Travel time: Materials Maintenance: --outsourced, but continuous review of costs and logistics Streamline workflow processes --Handheld project CS satisfaction --FM customer interaction; improved communication of status and work; Minimizing Response Time --Communications and coaching of individuals Training program --Greg?

Organizational Structure - 1995 DIRECTOR Assistant Director for Operations Assistant Director Energy & Utilities E l e c t r i a H V A C p n y P g u m b S o v s Z 1 2 3

Reorganized Structure DIRECTOR Energy & Utilities Academic Zone 1 Housing Zone Auxiliary- Billable Zone 2

Zone Map

Follow-up Labor Study - 1997

Performance Measures Work order completion rates Response time Backlog Distribution of trades worked PM completion percentage Customer satisfaction Sick time use Overtime costs O&M costs/square foot/function Facilities condition index (FCI)

Monthly Performance Measures Work Order Count – Academic 2

Monthly Performance Measures Response Days – Academic 1

Monthly Performance Measures Backlog Work Orders - Energy

Monthly Performance Measures Work Order by Trade- Housing

Preventative Maintenance Completion 100 FY97 FY98 80 60 40 20 Jun- Jun- Jul Aug Sep Mar Apr May Jul Aug Sep Oct Dec Jan Feb Mar 96 97 Acad 1 70 39 45 77 100 43 60 100 100 96 95 98 100 100 99 100 Acad 2 56 92 78 91 62 78 67 97 100 100 94 90 95 97 84 99 Auxiliary 76 86 86 88 6 100 99 100 100 100 100 94 99 99 97 99 Energy 26 40 72 72 100 100 92 82 100 95 91 98 92 94 90 98 Housing 34 76 77 100 88 98 96 99 88 99 99 99 100 100

Customer satisfaction (hang tags) Time Period: June 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003 YTD Responses: 410 Great Good Fair Poor Timeliness 87.1% 9.3% 2.9% 0.7% Courteousness 95.9% 3.2% 0.9% 0.0% Cleanliness 93.4% 5.4% 1.2% Satisfaction 92.2% 5.6% 1.7% 0.5%

Sick time comparison

Overtime comparison

Facilities Condition Index Facilities’ Needs Building Replacement Value FCI =

Continuous Improvement Processes

Summer Housing CI 2001 to 2002 Work Order Counts

Summer Housing C.I. Work distribution by trade type

Summer Housing C.I. Carpentry work details

Summer Housing C.I. Expeditures – Before and After

Achievements 164% increase in average square feet maintained per employee 109% improvement in productivity after reorganization 72% reduction in service response time 96% completion of preventative maintenance work orders in FY03, up from 43% in FY95. 98% customer satisfaction for the FY03 25% reduction in sick leave from FY98 to FY03 36% reduction in overtime from FY98 to FY03. 164% increase in average square feet maintained per employee - from 31,000 in 1989 to 82,000 in 2003. 109% improvement in productivity after reorganization -See Labor study notes: 1997, compared to 1995 72% reduction in service response time -from 18.1 days in 1995 to 5 days in 2003. Dramatic increase in preventative maintenance work order completion, from 43% in 1995 up to 96% in 2003. 98% customer satisfaction for the fiscal year 2001 - based on customer comment cards stating that service was good or great. 25% reduction in sick leave used from fiscal year 1998 to 2003 - capturing 1,376 hours of additional work time 36% reduction in overtime used from fiscal year 1998 to 2003. ORDER Changed to match with presentation

Benchmarking and Performance Measurement Physical Plant

“Nothing stops an organization faster than people who believe that the way they worked yesterday is the best way to work tomorrow.” --Jon Madonna CEO, KPMG