Author: Anna Miller

By Doug Banks

Healthcare architecture involves many parameters that shape and influence the ultimate design of any healthcare project. Some of the familiar ones are budget, schedule, intended use, and existing constraints of the site or building (if the project is a remodel). Less familiar, but no less important, are building codes, regulations, and guidelines that must be followed. Various jurisdictional authorities have a say in how a healthcare project is constructed. The local or state building official and a state’s health department are among these.

In Utah, the Department of Health and Human Services oversees compliance with various rules and regulations. The Department is assisted in its responsibilities by a citizen-based, governor-appointed committee called the Health Facilities Committee. This policy-making body consists of 12 volunteer members who represent all aspects of the healthcare community including design and construction, acute care, skilled nursing care, assisted living care and hospice care. Additionally, there are committee members that represent the consumer, the geriatric population, hospital trustees, ambulatory surgery centers and physicians. The committee is charged with establishing rules for licensing of healthcare facilities and the submission of architectural plans and specifications related to healthcare construction for department review.

The committee meets regularly four times a year, and at other times as needed in special sub-committees. A typical meeting consists of reviewing proposed rule changes that guide the construction or operations of healthcare facilities and receiving reports of facility surveys conducted on a regular basis by the department for compliance with state requirements.

An example of a recent new rule that was created is one for Pediatric Respite Care. This category of facility was not previously addressed in the state rules. An individual from the community brought to the committee for consideration the concept of a respite care facility where a child with severe care needs can receive nursing care for up to 14 days to allow family members respite from that daily care. Over the course of several meetings, the department, the Health Facilities Committee and the community member worked together to craft a new rule that addressed this particular facility type, ensuring proper nursing care and administrative oversight, as well as addressing design and construction aspects of this type of nursing facility.

As a member of the Health Facilities Committee, I see the effort the state invests in protecting the health of the public. My participation has been rewarding as I join with other professionals across the healthcare spectrum to maintain a high standard of healthcare in Utah. This committee responsibility also fits with my mandate as a licensed architect to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, a trust I take seriously in all my healthcare projects.

Nathan and Stephanie recently had an article published in Utah Construction & Design. The article is about the patient room and our focus on creating a space that supports the staff and encourages healing. You can read the article here on page 11.

By Pamika Sujitkiddee 

Throughout four years of sleepless nights in architecture school, I learned drafting, drawing, and designing. These are undeniably valuable and applicable to any of my dream careers. I also value all of the hard work, dedication, and friendships. But above all, I value the life lessons I learned in architecture school.  

Lesson 1: Failure   

One semester in, I wanted to give up because no one ever told me that architecture school normalized failure. Many disciplines teach people to solve the problems presented, but architecture students learn by creating problems and making mistakes, we learn by finding flaws in the “perfect design”—to improve and create an even better result. We are set up to struggle, be disappointed, and in short, fail. We learn by taking the wrong paths and are taught to let go of many good ideas to find a better one. We are pressured and pushed out of our comfort zone to explore other possibilities.  

Through several failed attempts, I realized that my good ideas are not always the best ideas. I learned that failure does not equal starting from zero, but instead means I am clearing the wrong paths out of my way. I learned to fail fast, so I can move on quickly because, in the professional world, mistakes have a price.   

Lesson 2: Accepting Criticism  

Toward the end of any school project, my emotions always feel like a roller coaster ride; exhaustion from all-nighters trying to execute complicated ideas, relief and pride to see the product of months of hard work, and sometimes disappointment when the responses are not as expected on the final day. But this rollercoaster of emotions had to happen for me to learn how to be accepting of criticism. I believe that one of the core principles of architecture school is the critique culture. Through many harsh critique sessions, I learned to see the positive in the negative and to recognize the value of different perspectives.  

I learned to expect an unexpected result and to shift my perspective about negative comments—from viewing them as being against my project to seeing them as improving my project. By stepping back, I was able to listen to critiques and focus on constructive criticism to improve myself and my project without self-judging and pressuring myself. Realizing everyone’s different experiences equal different points of view and taking that into consideration to create new solutions will produce better results. Architects have a point of view as architects, doctors have a point of view as doctors, and patients have a point of view as patients. The more points of view looking into the project, the more possibilities we are going to see based on our experiences. This means more solutions will be needed to create the best possible product. I believe that the level of satisfaction from the users best measures the success of the project.   

Lesson 3: Teamwork  

Architecture students practice mostly on individual projects, which might be the best way to pull out the unique talents of each individual but we can forget that, in the professional world, we will rarely be working alone. Having control over all the curves and corners in every design step is ideal but not a realistic practice after school. I’ve noticed that the amount of control over a project is the biggest difference between the school and working environments. While many students avoid conflicts by not working in a team, I think it was the most valuable lesson I learned from school. Since we cannot work alone, conflict is unavoidable, but it can be controllable. I believe that we can control conflict by communicating clearly and using a lot of patience.  

Working in a team not only allows me to accomplish more but also pushes me to explore beyond my comfort zone by sharing ideas and beliefs. Working in a firm, I can see a high level of teamwork and coordination in every project, and I do believe that working with a good team will lead to a project better than any individual can create on their own.  

I hope that I will never stop learning from the challenges I have to face. For my current stage of life—gaining new experience with TSA Architects—it is important to have understanding and patient coworkers who can help me learn and improve myself using the lessons I learned from architecture school. I am expecting to learn and excited to learn new valuable life lessons with wise and wonderful colleagues.