Entry Type ID Date Applicable Rating System Primary Credit Inquiry (LIs) Ruling (LIs) Related Addenda/LIs Related Resources Campus Applicable Internationally Applicable Country Applicability Reference Guide (Addenda) Page (Addenda) Location (Addenda) Description of Change (Addenda) "LEED Interpretation" "2335" "2008-09-11" "Existing Buildings" "EQc3.2 - Green cleaning - custodial effectiveness assessment" "We propose use of an alternate reference standard - Performance Assessment & Improvement System (PAIS) - as equivalent, or even superior, to APPA Custodial Staffing Guidelines, and therefore a suitable substitute methodology to utilize in rigorously assessing facility cleanliness, and achieving the associated LEED-EB credits. PAIS is a third-party performance measurement system developed by a national leader in performance-based management. It has been utilized (and continuously developed) across the United States for 32 years, at many facilities, including Fortune-500 companies and Ivy-League universities. We maintain that PAIS is more robust, objective and results in superior cleaning performance and operational effectiveness than APPA, for the following reasons: - APPA entails a one-time inspection whereas PAIS involves ongoing (quarterly) audits of cleanliness. - APPA targets educational facilities whereas PAIS is applicable to all building types. - APPA assesses facilities from a custodial service perspective whereas PAIS audits from an owner\'s perspective. PAIS surveys are necessarily done by independent, trained, third-party inspectors, acting in the sole interest of the owner/customer. - APPA is more subjective, with many variables dependent on inspectors whereas PAIS standards are consistent regardless of where, when or who inspects, making them objective, reliable and accurate. - APPA requires \'space inventory\' exercises and detailed knowledge of facilities to determine the number of room-types inspected whereas PAIS is implemented randomly, without requiring such knowledge, with sample sizes assuring statistical accuracy. - APPA assessments vary per room type and focus on \'common\' areas only. PAIS assessments do not change and address all room types, with a special focus on priority room-types such as restrooms. - APPA entails grouping items (horizontal surfaces) and assigning group appearance level ratings (orderly spotlessness). PAIS inspections go one step further in looking all items individually, from ceilings, walls, furniture, toilets, floors, and everything in-between. - APPA requires custodial staff knowledge to assign item group weights whereas PAIS measures results, not cleaning systems and procedures. It is clean, or it is dirty - period. - APPA audits adjust inspections, looking more closely at certain items and distinguishing between \'old\' and \'new\' dirt. PAIS seeks to assess each room without judgment, to first collect all relevant information. Careful data interpretation occurs after the audit itself. - With APPA, if cleanliness is found to vary for items in groups, assessors make judgments per level assignments. With PAIS, each item is rated \'satisfactory\' or unsatisfactory.\' A definition of \'clean\' is established by defining conditions customers DON\'T want to see (dust, streaks, etc.). If these conditions are not found on an item, it is \'satisfactory.\' Each \'un-satisfactory\' condition is recorded to provide data about cleaning problems. - PAIS generates detailed reports with prioritized information about specific cleaning problems, to facilitate continuous process improvement. These reports present data relative to targets and trends over time for items, room-types, etc., to enable process improvement opportunities for cleaning systems. Inspection and reporting standards compel custodial service providers to address not only appearance concerns, but also health and sustainability issues. How do PAIS scores equate to APPA levels? APPA Level LEED Credit PAIS Target 5 - Unkempt Neglect 0 0 - 49% 4 - Moderate Dinginess 0 50-59% 3 - Casual Inattention 1 60-69% 2 - Ordinary Tidiness 2 70-75% 1 - Orderly Spotlessness 2 75-85% n/a 2 85-100% World-class" "It is acceptable to use an auditing procedure other than APPA, provided that the project demonstrate equivalence or superiority to the APPA procedures in regards to the following key areas in the LEED application materials. a) Area of spaces included in the audit (i.e., must be at least 10% of total area cleaned) b) Diversity of spaces included in the audit (i.e., must include some level of auditing for each type of regularly occupied space in the project building) c) Items assessed (e.g., floors, horizontal surfaces, vertical surfaces, etc. d) Definition of clean (i.e., for dichotomous rating system that use a pass/fail methodology, pass must at least be equivalent to APPA\'s definition of ""Casual Inattention"" The conversion of APPA level to PAIS Target presented above should be included in the application materials, along with an explanation as to how this conversion was derived. Please note that this ruling is not validating the accuracy of the claims made in the Credit Interpretation Request regarding equivalency/superiority to APPA, but is rather establishing a path by which all third-party auditors can demonstrate equivalency to the APPA procedures. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X"