Ottawa University Clinic Infrastructure Performance Analysis Report

This report analyzes the infrastructure of the Ottawa University Clinic, focusing on its performance indicators and asset condition. It identifies the physical condition of assets as a key performance indicator, emphasizing the importance of assessing deterioration, maintenance, and replacement costs. The report details a rating system, using parameters like the condition of waste water distribution, pipes, and roads, to evaluate the facility's physical state. It also examines data collection, condition monitoring, and work history tracking, including repairs and maintenance. Furthermore, the report highlights the importance of considering the risk of failure and the consequences of asset failure, especially for critical assets. The analysis considers the clinic's capacity to serve a large student population and the demand for medical services. The report references several academic sources to support its findings, providing a comprehensive overview of infrastructure assessment within a healthcare setting.

1
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT
Name:

2
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT
Introduction
The selected infrastructure is Ottawa University Clinic. The healthcare facility boasts of
more than 40K students who are enrolled at the University (uOttawa, 2019). The Health Care
Centre is considered to be the largest and provisions addressing of concerns for the
Canadians. The identification of level of service tends to be crucial.
Performance Indicator
The performance indicator being utilized is the physical condition of asset. The
performance indicator takes into consideration the condition of the asset from a physical
perspective (Call, Lindsey, Spillane, 2016; Harrison, 2016; Koler, Ortner & Peters, 2018).
The physical state can well determine the amount of deterioration that the building has
undergone.
The remedy along with timing, the rate of deterioration, risk of expenditures of
unavoidable nature are significant factors that are closely associated. The crucial steps that
are required to form part of the performance indicator account for the review to be done, that
of current inventory. This step involves the essential that the recording of the asset condition
is being carried out with the condition of the asset. The determination of appropriate
condition and the comparison is with respect to the new asset. The measurement of data for
comparison has to follow a pattern (Mustafee, 2016; Willis, Cave & Kunc, 2018). The
collection of data is done and the tracking condition would be determined and analyzed based
on the state of the asset. The interconnection would be required to be exhibited between the
asset records long with the records of work history.
The checklist would be required to be well adhered while the comparison too is being
carried out and the determination of current condition along with the condition monitoring,
the rating of condition, the deteriorating modeling and the work history tracking are being
gauged. The steps that would be part of the condition refer to the current conditions which is
associated with the asset. The current condition of the asset is to be well determined and the
data needs to be recorded. It is also essential to determine the condition of the asset while
being comparable on the basis of a rating score. The scoring system formulated tends to be
crucial because it forms the basis of the rating which is carried out.
The inspection done for the physical asset is well considerable and the inspection would
need to be completed based on the recognized standards. The derivation of the measurement
can be considered to be reliable to a greater extent and the observations too being taken into
account (Schriber & Löwstedt, 2018). The condition monitoring of the physical asset on the
other hand would take into account the continuation assessment that is formulated based on
the municipality of the area. The comparison would be taking place in a manner wherein the
progress or the failure is accordingly judged. The identification of infrastructure and the gaps
provisioned based on the solutions ascertained form to be crucial.
The concept of modeling associated with the physical asset would form the deterioration
with the failure or the success considering the pattern of the asset. The municipality would be
required to take in the crucial decisions with respect to the management of the asset. The
work history tracking forms to be essential. It would have the considerable tracking history
which would include the repairs to be conducted for the buildings, the maintenance that
would have been completed as part of the project and the important indicator being the asset

3
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT
condition (Johnson, Butow, Kerridge & Tattersall, 2016). The tracking pertaining to the
work history would be crucial. This would be giving insight into the planning involved with
respect to the infrastructure. The maintenance versus the replacement costs would form to be
essential too.
The risk of failure always pertains with respect to the project. The consideration of
infrastructure failure including the requirement of sustenance form to be crucial component.
The critical asset with the major consequence being with respect to the failure tends to be
crucial. The ranking of the asset ‘Ottawa University Clinic’ would involve the ranking to be
done with respect of the crucial asset. The solution takes into account the replacement,
consequences ascertained in case of the failure of the asset and the linked costs.
Rating System To Evaluate Performance of Infrastructure
The rating system which is taken into consideration pertaining to the physical asset ‘
Ottawa University Clinic’ and the rating can be well exhibited based on the comparison done
of the system. The rating system would involve the consideration of the parameters linked to
the assessment done on the physical condition of the asset. The rating would be determined
based on the below parameters –
Rating Description
Excellent
The waste water distribution along with the rating for the pipes as
part of the asset and the rating of the roads is in excellent
condition
Good
The condition of the above stated parameters is in a condition
wherein the minor maintenance for the asset I required
Fair
The condition of the above stated parameters is in a condition
wherein the maintenance for the asset is to a considerable extent I
required
Poor
The condition of the above stated parameters is in a condition
wherein the deterioration has been considerable
Failing
The condition of the above stated parameters is in a condition
wherein replacement is required the asset I required
Table 1 – Rating and Description of Parameters for the Asset
The comparison based on the rating of the facility with the parameters would be crucial.
The strength indication based on the critical weight percentages is on the five point scale. On
the other hand this rating system demonstrates the physical aspects being considered with the
indicator taking into account the condition of the asset.
Evaluation: The Indicator Analysis takes into consideration the total score, wherein the
typical healthcare facility has the capabilities and the abilities for the number of patients. The
University of Ottawa would require the ascertainment of the demand of doctors as that are
required. The same can be well conducted with the comparison done.

4
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT
References
Call, J. M., Lindsey, K., Spillane, P., & Bliss, R. (2016). Real-time reliability-based dynamic
line rating system for transmission asset optimization. Power Engineer Journal, 18(1),
43-48.
Harrison, J.P. (2016). Essentials of Strategic Planning in Healthcare. United
States:Healthcare administration Press. pp. 47-49
Johnson, S., Butow, P., Kerridge, I., & Tattersall, M. (2016). Advance care planning for
cancer patients: a systematic review of perceptions and experiences of patients,
families, and healthcare providers. Psycho
‐Oncology, 25(4), 362-386.
Koler, A., Ortner, S., & Peters, M. (2018). Qualities and fi elds of action of destination
resilience: an indicator analysis process. In Destination Resilience (pp. 112-124).
Routledge.
Mustafee, N. (2016). A Synthesis of Operational Research for Emergency Planning in
Healthcare through the Triple Lens of Technique-Domain-Context. In Operational
Research for Emergency Planning in Healthcare: Volume 1 (pp. 1-11). Palgrave
Macmillan, London.
Schriber, S., & Löwstedt, J. (2018). Managing asset orchestration: A processual approach to
adapting to dynamic environments. Journal of Business Research, 90, 307-317.
Willis, G., Cave, S., & Kunc, M. (2018). Strategic workforce planning in healthcare: A multi-
methodology approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 267(1), 250-263.
uOttawa (2019, September 13). Research. Retrieved from: https://www.uottawa.ca/en

5
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT