Preliminary results of the Benchmarking 2.0 Report for Health Care Facilities from the IFMA Health Care Institute, American Society for Healthcare Engineering, and the Canadian Healthcare Engineering Society offered a glimpse to attendees of what’s to come when the survey is complete.

The preview was offered during the session “Unveiling of Benchmarking 2.0 Report for Health Care Facilities” held Nov. 5 at the HEALTHCARE DESIGN Conference in Phoenix. On hand were Ron Kalich, national facilities director, Kaiser Permanente, and Steve Rees, O&M benchmarks co-chair/Canada, vice president of capital management, Alberta Health Services, to discuss survey methodologies and uses.

The results shared were just a sneak peek of what’s in so far, as the groups have extended the deadline for the Benchmarking 2.0 survey until Nov. 30 (go to for more information).

The second iteration of the survey will provide expanded coverage, with additional topics including risk management, facility condition index, current replacement value, real estate and property management, and construction information. These will join previous survey questions regarding details like region, facility description, utilities, etc.

Also new to the 2.0 survey were additional facility types for respondents to use, including children’s hospitals, academic/research hospitals, long-term care facilities, urgent care, and primary care.

Among the initial information on hand was a look at the age of facilities focused on energy efforts, showing the bulk of programs taking place at buildings 31 to 50 years old. “Those ones I think are what give owners the most problems,” Rees says.

Looking at changes in utility costs, the preliminary results showed some improvement, with the percentage of facilities experiencing a -5.1% to -10% change in cost at 12% compared to 2% in the inaugural survey.

“There are a lot more facility owners who are learning how to improve conservation of energy,” Rees says.

The survey has also offered a glimpse at delivery methods in use on healthcare projects today, with 78% or respondents so far indicating they use a competitive bid most of the time, with 11% using it some of the time. Sixty-nine percent of respondents use a negotiated bid most of the time, with 22% using it some of the time. And while a hot topic for the industry, integrated project delivery saw just 2% of respondents using it most of the time and 18% using it some of the time.

Kalich went on to explain that benchmarking will offer industry members a chance to look past simple cost metrics when it comes to energy efficiency. “You need to understand the business drivers that underlie those cost metrics,” he says.

And doing so starts with having a baseline—of your own facility first and then an industry baseline to compare it against.