Facilities Development Division California’s Building Department for Hospitals Kerrilee Blunt, Executive Assistant Paul A. Coleman, Architect, Deputy Director Gary Dunger, Fire Marshal, Manager eServices Martin Fox, Associate Construction Analyst Roy Lobo, Ph.D., S.E., Principal Structural Engineer Gordon Oakley, Fire Marshal, Deputy Division Chief Chris Tokas, S.E., Deputy Division Chief Ken Yu, Manager Division Support Section HBSB Update December 07, 2016 1
Transcript
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Kerrilee Blunt, Executive AssistantPaul A. Coleman, Architect, Deputy Director
Gary Dunger, Fire Marshal, Manager eServicesMartin Fox, Associate Construction Analyst
Roy Lobo, Ph.D., S.E., Principal Structural EngineerGordon Oakley, Fire Marshal, Deputy Division Chief
Chris Tokas, S.E., Deputy Division ChiefKen Yu, Manager Division Support Section
HBSB UpdateDecember 07, 2016
1
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Plan Review and Field Performance Update
2
$13.19
$3.43 $0.89
$7.77
$1.10
$-
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$ Bi
llion
s
Totals In Review Pending Construction Start Under Construction In Closure
Workload in Construction Values 2012+57
%
3
Workload in Construction Values for projects in Collaborative Plan Review - Custody Status
4
$0.1
4 B
$0.1
7 B
$0.1
8 B
$0.0
1 B $0
.20
B $0.4
4 B
$0.1
1 B
$1.2
6 B
$0.2
4 B
$0.2
4 B
$0.1
2 B
$0.0
1 B
$0.3
2 B
$0.2
2 B
$0.0
6 B
$1.2
1 B
$0.00 B
$0.50 B
$1.00 B
$1.50 B
$2.00 B
$2.50 B
CentralRegion
CoastalRegion
North Region Rapid ReviewUnit
North LosAngelesRegion
South LosAngelesRegion
South Region Sum
Cons
trut
ion
Valu
e in
Bill
ions
$
Workload Construction Values for projects in the Plan Review State - Custody Status
In Office
With designers
Total= $2,472,192,059
Not Including Collaborative Review Projects
History of Custody in Terms of Project Costs
5
No. of Reviews Year 2016-Dec
65.4%
34.6%
≈ 63 reviews/day
6
No. of Reviews Year 2015
63%
37%
64.6%
35.4%
2014 Numbers
≈ 64 reviews/day
≈ 61 reviews/day
7
Project Plan Review Data Analysis Year 2016-Dec
68% of the Plan Reviews are completed w/in 21 days or less
Σ=1872 or 13% of All Projects
92% of the PAD Reviews are completed w/in 21 days or lessOr 40% of Office Plan ApprovalReviews
8
Workload Summary/Performance
9
Workload in Construction Values for projects in the Plan Review State
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Accomplishments for 2016 to Date
FDD’s Top 3 Objectives for 2016
1. Electronic Document (Plans/Files) Storage
2. IT equipment refresh Office/Field
3. Office relocation and Smooth Transition to the New OSHPD Headquarters Building
16
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Read, Analyze, Construct, Measure, and Report Review the codes Determine which can be converted to machine readable content (rules) Create rule templates Apply to models Measure results to verify ‘intent’ is met Report
Industry Seminars in 2016• CSHE Annual Meeting• California Hospital Association – Webinar on New ePC Process • HBSB Seminars: Lessons Learned During Construction *• IOR Recertification Training Seminar • Kaiser National Inspection • Accela Highlands• DPR Construction N. Cal.• SCDF – LA• CDPH Seminar
* Co-sponsored by the HBSB Education and Outreach Committee
Industry Seminars in 2016
• California Automatic Fire Alarm Association – Electronic Plan Submittal Process
• DPR Construction Company Southern California Healthcare Summit – OSHPD Update and Future of Healthcare in California
• Kaiser Preferred Provider Seminar – New ePC Process • Cambridge Healthcare System – OSHPD Process • California Automatic Fire Alarm Association – State Agency
Meeting • AIA Healthcare Committee – OSHPD Update and New ePC
Process
Industry Seminars in 2016
• Society of Fire Protection Engineers – 2016 SFPE Fire Protection Engineering Forum
• California Society of Healthcare Engineers, Central Valley Chapter – OSHPD Update and the New ePC Process
• Stantec Architects – New ePC Process• Sutter Health – Project Closure Process
Quarterly Meetings with Industry in 2016
• Adventist Health• CAHF Quarterly Meetings• CHA Quarterly Task Force Committee• CDPH L&C• CPMC• LLUMC• St. Joseph Health System• UC Health Systems• Prime Healthcare• LPCH
20
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Read, Analyze, Construct, Measure, and Report Review the codes Determine which can be converted to machine readable content (rules) Create rule templates Apply to models Measure results to verify ‘intent’ is met Report
FDD’s Achievements in 20161. Propose and submit cost effective building codes & standards that better align with
national standards to the Building Standards Commission for adoption for the 2016 Intervening Cycle of the California Building Standards Code
2. New regulations pertaining to Locked I-2 occupancies for CBC mid-cycle3. Published the FDD app for android & IOS phones on Google and Apple Store4. Published 3 datasets for the CHHS OpenData Portal5. Published new webpage California Hospital & SNF Data (searchable)6. Reduced SPC-1 building count from 256 (8.6%) to 226 (7.5%). Therefore, collapse
risk SPC-1 buildings now constitute less than 8% of the General Acute Care Hospital Building Inventory
7. Reduced NPC-1 building count from 236 (7.7%) to 211 (6.7%)8. Developed an automated process to notify CDPH and Hospital representatives of
the 95% Construction project completion milestone to Plan for CDPH L+C survey9. Started a new FLSO Academy10.New HBSB Committee: Energy Conservation & Management Committee
FDD’s Achievements in 201611. SB 499, all reports filed timely and met the deadline due to OSHPD &CHA efforts12. Deployed integrated electronic plan check program for projects < $500k 13. Organizational Change Management Training (ePC)14. eSP Electronic Plan Review Deployment Celebration with Industry – July 19 and 20 in
Sac and L.A.15. Instituted Over the Computer Reviews whenever possible16. IT equipment refresh Office/Field17. Adopted ShakeCast Platform for automatic notification of shaking levels at FDD
facilities for seismic events with ranked inspection priorities. ShakeCast Servers now run under the OSHPD account on Amazon Web Services
18. Developed additional tools and processes to improve staff plan review efficiencies24. Maintained plan review goals above 95%25. Start of Enterprise Data Warehouse, EDW project (FDD being the first OSHPD division
to participate) to improve archiving and cross-division sharing of data. This will replace current use of Access databases of Accela data
FDD’s Achievements in 201626. Developed template project platform for 18 N. Cal. Kaiser Hospital patient lift w/standard
details & procedures27. Maintained plan review goals above 95%28. Start of Enterprise Data Warehouse, EDW project (FDD being the first OSHPD division to
participate) to improve archiving and cross-division sharing of data. This will replace current use of Access databases of Accela data
29. Developed template project platform for 18 N. Cal. Kaiser Hospital patient lift w/standard details & procedures
30. XPB - companion to FREER projects, intended to facilitate repair, maintenance, minor renovation/remodeling, or installation of certain equipment projects in SNFs.
31. eCheckList for Fluoroscopy Equipment Replacement in Hospitals32. Virtual technical staff training meetings33. Established task force to look at repurposing existing buildings34. Developed the OPAA program to substitute the OPL program35. 70 OPM’s approved
FDD’s Achievements in 201636. New templated SNF Plan Review Program 37. Software and Hardware upgrades to facilitate and support Electronic Plan Check:
– Accela Version 8 for Windows 10 compatibility– Laptop replacement with 15.6” UHD touchscreen– Interactive drafting boards– Large format touch displays for eOTC– Electronic Document Storage/Cloud Storage
FDD 2015/16 Operational Plan
25
FDD 2017 - 2020 Operational Plan
26
Invoicing and Project Closure
27
Number of Open Invoices
Invoicing and Project Closure
28
Value of Open Invoices
FDD Income and Expenses
29
$-
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$23,015
$16,547
Thou
sand
s Income
Expenses
FDD Income and Expenses
30
$60.61M
$16.55M
$39.41M
$11.16M
$21.21M
$5.39M
$22.86M
0
$10M
$20M
$30M
$40M
$50M
$60M
$70M
Jul 01 Jul 31 Aug 31 Sep 30 Oct 31 Nov 30 Dec 31 Jan 31 Feb 29 Mar 31 Apr 30 May 31 Jun 30
FDD
Budg
et in
Mill
ions
Target Budgeted $
Y-T-D Expenditures
Target Budgeted Salariesand Benefits $
Y-T-D Salaries & BenefitsExpenditures
Target OE/E Budgeted $
Y-T-D Expenditures &Encumbrances *
Y-T-D Cash Income
FDD Expenditures FY 2016/17
31
67.42%13.14%
19.44%
FDD 2016/17 Expenditures thru 10/31/16
Personal Services
General Expenses, I.T./Equipment & Purchases in Process
OSHPD Overhead - Admin. & I.T.
Total Reimbursements - IOR/Seminars
EOC
FDD Org Chart
32
Method of Submittal
33
61%
65%71%
75%76%
78%81%
81%
81%83%
85%85%
85%86%
84%87%
87%
85%89%
88%87%
89%91%
88%
89%91%
90%
92%92%
93%93%
91%
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Num
ber o
f Rec
ords
Year-Month
Count of Records By Submission Method
AA Submitted Created by eCA
ePC Update
34
On June 27, 2016, FDD began accepting electronic plans for all New Projects and PADs on existing project where Construction Costs were $500,000 or less.
ePC Update
35
Submittal Type Number
New Projects 1,142
Amended Construction Documents 3,524
Deferred Submittal Items 271
Total 4,937
Since the June 27th Go-Live date there have been 4,937 plans submitted for review and approval that were eligible or electronic plan check.
ePC Update
36
Submittal Type Number Paper Electronic
New Projects 1,142 805 (70%) 337 (30%)
Amended Construction Documents 3,524 3,207 (91%) 317 (9%)
Deferred Submittal Items 271 231 (85%) 40 (15%)
Total 4,937 4,243 (86%) 694 (14%)
Submittals on paper continue to be more prevalent than electronic plan submittal
ePC Update
37
Several design firms were contacted to determine the reason they continue to submit projects on paper rather than electronic; responses included:
– This is the way they’re used to doing it– They’re not comfortable with the new process– They’re waiting for ‘bugs’ to be worked out– Field reviews on paper can facilitate simple
corrections to the plans– Some field staff refuse to do electronic review in the
field– The eOTC process is still foreign to OSHPD office
staff
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Unauthorized Construction Investigations
Unauthorized Construction Investigations
39
• In 2015 there were 124 investigations of unauthorized construction; in 2016 there 89.o 79 investigations were in Hospitalso 136 investigations were in Skilled Nursing Facilities
• There has been more than 210 staff hours spent investigating these projects.
• $34,145.14 in fees have been assessed for these projects.
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Expedited Building Permits
xBP
42
xBP
43
• In January, 2016, OSHPD expanded the How-To Guide Series of projects and created the Expedited Building Permit, or XBP.
• Expedited Building Permits are companion the FREER project and are intended to facilitate repair, maintenance, minor renovation/remodeling, or installation of certain equipment projects.
• The Expedited Building Permit Guides are intended only for single-story OSHPD 2 Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) and Intermediate Care Facilities (ICFs)
xBP
44
• Since California Health & Safety Code Section 129875 exempts certain projects from plan review, Expedited Building Permits include a compliance checklist that, when completed, immediately indicates if the project is eligible for an XBP.
• The RCO is immediately notified when an eligible XBP is submitted. If the application is complete, the XBP is issued within 1 or 2 days.
xBP
45
In 2016, OSHPD issued 54 Expedited Building Permits
o Handrail Replacement XBPs: 9o TV/Monitor Bracket Installation XBPs: 6o Water Heater Replacement XBPs: 38
eCheck List
46
eTIO
47
eOTC
48
eOTC
49
eOTC
50
eCPR
Auto Codes
e
51
eRAD
52
OSHPD Enterprise Data Warehouse Project
Overview12/2016
Why Enterprise Data Warehouse?OSHPD data is stored in at least 9 different systems, including Facilities Development Division (FDD). Even FDD’s data has a lot of fragmentation over our systems.
Patient Data(IP, ED, AS)
AnnualUtilization Data
ALIRTS
Healthcare Information Division (HID)
MIRCal
Patient Data Section (PDS)
eSP
Facilities Development Division (FDD)
ApplicationsBuilding Permits
InspectionsSeismic Compliance
Invoicing
Grant Applicants (Individual, Facility)
Grant AwardeesPractice Locations
Monitoring
CalREACH
HWDD, HPEF
LicenseeEducation
Employment
Clearinghouse
Healthcare Workforce Development Division
(HWDD)
Cal-Mortgage
Cal-Mortgage Loan Insurance Division
Health Facility Construction Loans
Annual and Quarterly Financial Reports
Hospitals Home Health & Hospice
Long-Term CarePrimary Care Clinics
Specialty Clinics
HospitalsEmergency
DepartmentsAmbulatory Surgery
Centers
Hospitals (General Acute, Acute Psych., Chemical
Dependency)Licensed Clinic
Skilled Nursing & Interm.Correctional Treatment
Facilities Applying/Awarded Grants
Grantee’s Practice Facility
Licensee’s Facility Practice Location
Eligible Health Care Facilities
Hospitals Long-Term Care
SIERA
Healthcare Information Division (HID)
SOURCESYSTEM
FACILITIES
DATA TYPE
SAMPLING OF DATA
COLLECTED
FacilityFacility Location
Patient Patient Location
SSNAge
Race/EthnicityGender
LanguageMedical Procedure
Codes Service Dates
Provider ID...
Facility Location
Status Applicant NameAddress/Location
Race/EthnicityAge
GenderDL Number
Award AmountEducation
EmploymentBudgets
Survey Data...
FacilityLocation
Contact InformationFinancial Data
Loan TermsDatesStatus
…......
FacilityLocationProjects
ApplicationsBuilding Permits
Construction Costs (e.g., planned, updated, final)
Seismic StatusInvoicing
InspectorsField Visits
...……
License NumberLicense Type
License StatusLicensee Location
Race/EthnicityAge
GenderEffective Date
Expiration DataStudent
Student LocationMajor/Degree
Planned Graduation Date…..
FacilityLocation
Patients AdmittedPatients by Pymt Source
Discharge by LOSRace/Ethnicity
AgeEquipment Detail
Capital Expenditures# by Health Services
# by Community ServiceRural Health Clinic
# in Fed. Poverty Level# Encounters by Service
...
FacilityLocation
Annual FinancialsQuarterly Financial &
UtilizationSubmission Status
Contact InfoReport Submission Data
...
...
Advantages of EDW to OSHPD
• Leverage information as an asset• Relieve pressure to streamline costs, and
increase the return on investment• Eliminate manually intensive data gathering
and reporting processes.• Build the foundation for a fully integrated
reporting platform across all OSHPD. • Provide relevant, accurate and timely
information to the program areas.• Enable data trending over time
Advantages of EDW to FDD
• Daily automatic key performance indicators (KPIs) available for management and public.
• Various dashboards and report cards that will based on data stored in the EDW.
• Storage of data history, so that trends can be drawn over time.• Connection of OSHPD/FDD website to EDW data (read only) so
updates on seismic compliance are automatic and near real time.• Connection of CHHS Opendata portal to EDW data (read only) so
updates on seismic compliance are automatic and near real time.• Custom queries can reference EDW data (including other OSHPD
divisions) for responses to public records request.
Tools Used/Schedule• Database: SQL
Server 2012 • Data Modeling:
Sparx• Extract
Transform Load: Informatica
• Team Environment: Team Foundation Server
• Visualization: Tableau
• Reporting: SSRS
• Statistics: SAS
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3Activity
▪ Infrastructure
– Plans, Schedule, Resources– Communications
▪ Project Management
▪ Scope & Charter▪ Vision/Mission/GoalsPlanning
Execution▪ Enterprise Data Modeling
6 Months– Phase 1 (FDD/HWDD C4O)
– Assessment/Lessons Learned
– Phase 2 – (Clearinghouse/UDM)
– Assessment/Lessons Learned
– Phase 3 – (MIRCal IP/ED/AS)
– Future Phases
▪ Build & Maintain
On-going activities
3 Mon
6-7 Mon
6 Months
– Maintenance & Operations
RequirementsDesign (ETL)
Database BuildTesting
User AcceptanceProduction
ReleaseTBD
– Software, Services▪ Procurement
– Organizational Alignment– BI Training– Adopt/Develop BI Standards– Governance/Stewardship
▪ Establish BI Competency Center
Dashboards in test phase – Projects by Geographic Regions
Filters for customization – can select region, status, date range
Dashboards in test phase – Projects by Assigned Regions
View customized to “In construction” and “In Closure”
Dashboards in test phase – BackcheckKPI
Key Performance Indicator: Number of Projects ≥
Backcheck 3
Future Dashboards in Development• Project Assessment (formerly known as Report Card)
– Compare a given project to “similar” projects in terms KPIs such as number of backchecks, total time from project submittal to approval, possession of the project during the review (time project was with OSHPD/FDD vs time with design time)
– KPIs are presented as averages and 95% confidence limits• Facility report card
– Compare all projects at a facility to state averages (with 95% confidence limits)
• Design professional review card– Compare all projects for a design professional to state averages for
“similar” projects• Various trend dashboards and staff KPIs – time permitting…
Data for Hospital Facilities
• Located at: https://www.oshpd.ca.gov/FDD/Forms/keyplans/index.html
Sacramento Warehouse• Target move date late 2016 or early 2017• Lease signed • TI work in progress
• Electrical and data• Additional racks• Electrical connection for fork lift charger• 3 – 16,000 cfm min. evaporative coolers for warehouse• 2 – 100,000 btuh min. space heaters for warehouse• Supervisor space in office
Relocations Update
72
Los Angeles Office• Wells Fargo Center
• Downtown Los Angeles on Bunker Hill, in Los Angeles, California. It comprises
• Target move date unknown at this time• DGS currently negotiating with building
owners/managers
Relocations Update
73
Facilities Development DivisionCalifornia’s Building Department for Hospitals
Looking Ahead
Trends We Are Seeing in Workload
There will be more than 700 SPC-2 buildings to deal with between now and 2030• SPC–4D projects• Replacement buildings • Continuation of small renovation projects • Repurposing of SPC-1 buildings
75
Upcoming Programs/Processes
• FDD will continue transitioning to Electronic Plan/Archive storage –eliminate paper plan archives
• Continued development of manners in which clients may interact with FDD, such as Virtual OTCs, GO To Meeting, etc. – may eliminate need for off-site OTCs, such as San Diego
• Development of a web-based training program for Inspectors of Record
• Continuing trend to move closer to model codes with fewer amendments
![PowerPoint Presentation Facilities Development Division. 1/2020 3. Part 2 – Chapter 2 Definitions. REMOVED FROM ACUTE CARE SERVICE [OSHPD 1R]. Buildings that previously provided](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5e6b0d2b23ce8d46737ceb5b/powerpoint-presentation-facilities-development-division-12020-3-part-2-a-chapter.jpg)
