CLIENT

SOLUTION REQUIREMENTS

Development of an energy management and facilities upgrade program that meets required internal financial hurdles.

Additional key requirements:

  • Change management and integration across varied cost centres
  • Defining “what are suitable upgrades” in a residential aged care environment
  • Minimising disruption and focusing on achievable upgrades

PROJECT OUTCOMES

Development of a detailed Attractiveness vs. Achievability matrix that mixes non-energy benefits and financial project metrics.

Attractiveness Weighting Description Ranking Criteria
Energy and Water Savings / Payback Period
45%
Reduced energy costs / natural hedge against Network and Retail energy cost inflation 5 = ROI <3 years,
1 = ROI < 5 years
Brand / Reputation / Advocacy (External Stakeholders)
25%
Marketing, reputational and brand improvements (external stakeholders) / leadership role in advocating renewable energy and clean technologies 5 = Best Practice,
1 = Standard Practice
Productivity and Inspiration (Internal Stakeholders)
10%
Engaging and inspiring employees and internal stakeholders around social and environmental vision 5 = Best Practice,
1 = Standard Practice
Operational and Maintenance Savings
10%
Reduction in ongoing operational and maintenance costs / internal labour / soft costs 5 = Significant Reduction,
1 = Little to No Reduction
Regulatory Risk Reduction / Compliance
10%
Reduction in compliance and regulatory risks / preparation for dealing with future compliance / carbon tax impacts 5 = Addresses key Know Risks,
1 = Unlikely to address Future Risks
Achievability Weighting Description Ranking Criteria
Project Simplicity / Complexity
40%
Complexity in implementing and scaling proposed solution 5 = Simple Implementation,
1 = Highly Complex Project
Ease of Implementation
30%
Timeframe from concept, through design and engineering to final implementation at scale 5 = Less than 3 Months,
1 = Greater than 12 Months
Ability to Outsource / Internal Resources
30%
Use of internal resources and staff in concept design, implementation and validation 5 = Does not require In-House Resources,
1 = Heavy Investment of Internal Resources / Staff Time

When this ranking was developed across the portfolio of sites the following weighting were developed to help understand where to invest in sustainability.

HERE MORE ABOUT OUR INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROJECT FROM UNITINGCARE QUEENSLAND’S SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER