Author
Listed:
- Smith, Clayton
(Children’s Health System of Texas, USA)
- Mochel, Mark
(Brightly, A Siemens Company, USA)
Abstract
Healthcare organisations face continuous pressure to effectively manage expenses and improve profit margins while meeting the growing demands in the communities they serve. In parallel, the infrastructure is getting older, with deferred maintenance statistics showing that a significant number of US hospitals and the associated mechanical, electrical and plumbing assets required to safely operate those facilities have exceeded industry expected useful life and should be considered for replacement. The data further suggest that without intervention, this ageing trend will continue well into the next decade. Healthcare organisations must also consider hardening facilities against natural disasters and cyber-security threats, improving energy efficiency, reducing carbon emissions and reimagining the role of the facility itself in the future of healthcare. In some cases, these considerations are discretionary, while in others may be mandatory as part of legislative or regulatory requirements. Nevertheless, these requirements create a perfect storm of conflicting financial priorities that will challenge the entire industry for years to come. In the face of these ongoing challenges, traditional methods of budgeting and forecasting may no longer suffice. This paper will define the concept of asset-driven budgeting and introduce plant operating cost correlation coefficients and infrastructure renewal metrics to demonstrate a positive return on investment (ROI) in reducing deferred maintenance. Why? Looking past traditional US$/sq ft metrics, it is important to recognise that the primary cost drivers in any facility are the existing and installed assets themselves, the asset densities required for different service lines and occupancy types, and the age/ design/layout of the facility itself. Without transformational levels of investment to address deferred maintenance and alter the current state of the legacy infrastructure, it can be difficult to achieve anything other than incremental efficiency gains. With infrastructure investment, Risk of Inaction = ROI = Return on Investment.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
- I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aza:mih000:y:2025:v:9:i:3:p:290-299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Henry Stewart Talks (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.