Occupant Comfort Survey

Leanne, are you thinking of a specific set of credit requirements?It's important to note that there is not a credit  for thermal comfort surveys in LEED v4.In the LEED 2009 credit, there is a 6–18 month period you are supposed to do it in. That accounts for evening out of new-building oddities.

Hi Leanne, I'm looking through the link you provided and I also don't see any timing requirement or guidelines. Tristan mentioned that the BDC v2009 credit specified 6 to 18 months, and in addition to that, the credit actually only required a commitment / agreement to do the survey, not a copy of the actual survey or results (see https://www.usgbc.org/node/1732395?return=/credits). So it sort of seems like the BDC v4 Innovation credit is based on the EBOM version of the comfort survey, rather than on the BDC v2009 version. I can definitely see how you wouldn't want to wait so long to conduct the survey, and the credit got around this previously by only asking for an agreement. Tristan also makes a good point that the timing should reflect normal operations so that you can really understand any occupant comfort issues. So, I'm leaning towards recommending that you contact GBCI about this directly. It's just not clear to me if they'd prefer that you wait to do the survey (and only "agree" to do it like in BDC v2009), or if they'd want you to actually perform the survey and implement corrective actions (and if so, in what time frame). Please let us know what the outcome of your conversation with GBCI is if you decide to contact them!

Hi Leanne, Did you get a response from GBCI concerning the timeline to implement the survey? Is an agreement from the owner sufficient?

We've submitted this credit as an ID strategy for our CI project. I would use the 6-18 mo guideline. The thing that is not necessarily clear from the language (though they may have updated it) is that you must not only administer the survey, but for the documentation, you must also provide the results, if you had to perform any corrective actions, etc. That's what tripped us up, though we ended up being able to provide it.

I am trying to interpret the requirements "Perform at least one survey and implement corrective actions"  (this indicates just one survey is required) followed by "At a minimum, perform one new survey at least once every 2 years"  (indicates the survey is an on-going commitment).  Emily, was your project required to have an agreement to re-survey every two years, without an end date?

Hi Heather,  I believe we included a statement in our survey narrative committing to conducting the survey bi-annually as required for the foreseeable future. Administering the survey helps to confirm the systems remain functioning as intended throughout the year (from the occupants' standpoint, anyway), helps see patterns in issues, etc. For the info you'll submit, it's the survey, itself, the results, and a narrative of whatever actions you may have had to have taken to correct any issues that arose. 

For a v4 ID+C project, I submitted this credit at the preliminary combined review, indicating we would administer the survey at 6 months post-occupancy.  However, the reviewer indicated that since this was a v4 project, in which performance is key, we needed to administer the survey with followup and report prior to the final certification review.  So we did.  I'm wondering if this is the new "norm" for v4.

I believe it is the norm. The previous "promise" to administer was probably just too lax and too easy for projects to document but not actually administer.
The thing I dislike the most is the delay in certification that this strategy requires in order to administer it and get the results. It's even longer than waiting for all the Cx activities to complete. Many of my clients don't want to do it for that reason, alone.

I turned in the survey and process during my combined D/C review and was told by the reviewer that since v4 is based on performance, the survey must be performed and corrections made to earn the credit.  So we released the survey and corrections are being implemented by are not totally complete, but we needed to send in for final review, so we updated the progress of the corrections for the final review.   I have an issue with this immediate timeframe and moreso for this project, where the owner was implementing a new innovative work environment for this space.  Naturally, it often takes about 6 months for most people to settle in after a move to a new space, but in this case the survey results showed a lot of initial issues.  Most were related to smaller workspaces, more open concept (acoustics, clutter, lack of storage, etc).  After the people had lived in the space and adjusted their protocols, there were markedly fewer issues.  I think trying to rush the survey before people have a chance to settle in is not ideal.  On the other hand if it encouraged people to come together to find shared solutions, great--but I think this would have happened anyway.  Other thoughts?