Home  »  Membership Awards and Recognition

2015 Award Nominations and Applications Due November 30, 2014!

Nominations and applications are now being taken for APPA’s 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Please use the navigation below to scroll through pages

Award for Excellence

Summary

The APPA Award for Excellence is designed to recognize and advance excellence in the field of educational facilities. Originally established in 1988, the Award for Excellence is APPA's highest institutional honor and provides educational institutions the opportunity for national and international recognition for their outstanding achievements in facilities management. The award is designed to highlight the essential role of facilities operations in the overall institutional mission and vision. Award for Excellence nominations are evaluated using the same criteria applied through the Facilities Management Evaluation Program (FMEP) in the areas of: leadership; strategic and operational planning; customer focus; information and analysis; development and management of human resources; process management; and, performance results. Nominated institutions also submit to a site review conducted by an awards evaluation team, when appropriate. The Award for Excellence designation is valid for a period of five years.


Nominations are now being taken for APPA's 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

The Award for Excellence is open to any APPA Institutional member. Multi-campus or state systems may submit applications for system-wide or individual operations.

Institutions that wish to be considered for the Award for Excellence must submit application materials to APPA no later than November 30, 2014.

Final evaluation regarding the Award will be made some time in April/May and will be submitted for approval to APPA's Board of Directors. Award recipients will be recognized at APPA's annual conference banquet in August of the same year. Other AFE recognition actions will be included to provide additional exposure for the award recipient, including the request for each winning institution to provide the committee with a 3-5 minute digitized video on your institution.

The criteria have been designed to provide a systems perspective for facilities management. Successful management of the overall facilities enterprise requires synthesis and alignment of the organization's various components. Successful award applicants will be those who demonstrate the ability to look at the organization as a whole, focus on what is important to the enterprise, and concentrate on key linkages with the goal of improving overall performance and satisfying customers.

When addressing the criteria, applicants should stress results, creating value, satisfying customer needs, and identifying key linkages. More specific points related to each of the seven criteria are given in the table further below in this document or are available for download.

Download criteria.
Section Topic Points
Section 1.0 LEADERSHIP
The facilities organization's senior leaders should set direction and establish customer focus, clear and visible values, and high expectations in line with Campus mission, vision, and core values. Leaders inspire the people in the organization and create an environment that stimulates personal growth. They encourage involvement, development and learning, innovation and creativity.
150 points
Section 1.1 Leadership roles and responsibilities are clearly defined.
Section 1.2 The leadership system is understood by and communicated among all levels.  The leadership system includes mechanisms for the leaders to conduct self-examination, receive feedback, and make improvements.
Section 1.3 The organization has clearly aligned its mission, vision, and values statements with those of the Campus.  Regularly communicates with employees, customers, suppliers, and other stakeholders.
Section 1.4 Facilities management leaders spend time on a regular basis with their customers and front-line staff.
Section 1.5 Performance measures at each level of the organization are clearly defined.
Section 1.6 Senior leaders establish and reinforce an environment where shared values support self-direction, innovation, and decentralized decisionmaking.
Section 1.7 Informed of current trends and practices in the industry.
Section 1.8 A succession plan is in place to ensure continuity of leadership.
Section 2.0 STRATEGIC & OPERATIONAL PLANNING
Strategic and operational planning consists of the planning process, the identification of goals and actions necessary to achieve success, and the deployment of those actions to align the work of the organization. The facilities organization should anticpate many factors in its strategic planning efforts: changing customer expectations, business and partnering opportunities, technological developments, evolving regulatory requirements, and societal expectations, to name but a few.
150 points
Section 2.1 A strategic plan exists that includes the goals and objectives of the department.
Section 2.2 The strategic plan was developed with participation from internal and external stakeholders, approved by the administration, and effectively communicated.
Section 2.3 Customer needs and expectations serve as major drivers for setting strategic direction.
Section 2.4 Goals and key performance measures are understood by all and periodically reviewed.
Section 2.5 Performance measures at each level of the organization are used to meet goals.
Section 2.6 A budget is developed with input from staff that reflects historic expenditures, an analysis of needs, effective allocation of available resources to support the organization's goals and objectives, and seeks new and innovative measures to leverage resources.
Section 2.7 Standards have been defined for overall operational performance, built environment, and landscape.
Section 2.8 A campus master plan in place, current and utilized for decision making.
Section 2.9 The operational units participate in the development of the construction program and are active participants in the acceptance of completed projects.
Section 2.10 Strategies and processes are in place to ensure continuity of functions in the event of staff turnover or other disruption.
Section 2.11 Emergency response plans are in place, current, and communicated to facilities employees and the campus community as required.
Section 3.0 CUSTOMER FOCUS
Customer satisfaction is a key component of effective facilities management. Various stakeholders (faculty, students, other administrative departments) must feel their needs are heard, understood, and acted upon. Various tools must be in place to assure customer communication, assess and assimilate what is said, and implement procedures to act on expressed needs.
150 points
Section 3.1 Surveys, tools, and other methods are used to identify customer requirements, expectations, and satisfaction levels.
Section 3.2 The roles, responsibilities, and services provided by the facilities department are well defined, communicated, and understood within the department and by all communities served.
Section 3.3 Levels of service are set to exceed customer expectation and are defined in terms that can be understood by the administration, building users, and facilities staff.
Section 3.4 The communities served know how to obtain, monitor progress, and evaluate the services
offered. 
Section 3.5 Customer feedback is used to build positive relationships, drive processes, and effect improvements.
Section 3.6 Campus users have a clear understanding and positive view of the services provided by the facilities organization.
Section 4.0 INFORMATION and ANALYSIS
Information and analysis is used to evaluate performance and drive future performance improvements. Of interest are the types of tools used (for example, peer comparative data clarified and validated through benchmarking), and how the tools are used to enhance organizational performance. Various aspects of information include facilities inspections/audits, financial/expenditure reports, utility data, and other relevant measures and indicators.
100 points
Section 4.1 A systematic process is in place for identifying and prioritizing performance indicators, comparative information, and benchmarking studies for the most critical areas.
Section 4.2 Benchmarking results, comparisons, and performance indicators are tracked and used to drive action within the organization.
Section 4.3 The department ensures that data and information are communicated and accessible to all appropriate users.  The required data and information have all the characteristics users need, such as reliability, accuracy, timeliness, and appropriate levels of security and confidentiality.
Section 4.4 An effective facilities inspection or audit program is in place that provides a regular appraisal of facilities conditions, identifies maintenance and repair needs, and quantifies facilities maintenance resource requirements.
Section 4.5 An expenditure report is available to managers on a regular basis and is used to effectively evaluate and control expenditures in assigned sub-units.
Section 4.6 An effective system of measuring and recording utility data is in place and is used to establish trends, minimize costs, promote energy conservation, and encourage environmental preservation.
Section 4.7 The organization has a process to ensure that hardware and software systems are user-friendly, reliable, up-to-date, and meet the needs of all users.
Section 5.0 DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
An organization's success depends increasingly on the knowledge, skills, innovative creativity, and motivation of its employees and partners.  This criterion addresses the ways in which the facilities organization ensures a continuing learning environment through communication, policies, recognition, training, professional development opportunities, and other methods.
100 points
Section 5.1 Staff positions are properly classified and allocated in adequate numbers to meet the standards for the targeted level of service.
Section 5.2

Training programs provide for new employee orientation and technical skills enhancement for all staff.

Section 5.3 An effective communication system exists within the department to ensure that each employee knows his or her role in the department, the role of related areas, and the overall role of the department.
Section 5.4 Safety policies and procedures have been established, written, and communicated to all staff.
Section 5.5 Accident records are maintained and used to reduce accidents and identify tasks for special attention.
Section 5.6 The organization promotes employee development and professional development through formal education, training, and on-the-job training such as rotational assignments, internships, or job exchange programs.
Section 5.7 Career development is supported through involvement in job-related and professional organizations, and opportunities to advance within the department.
Section 5.8 Work performance and attendance tracking measures are in place, are understood by staff members, and are used by supervisors to assess performance.
Section 5.9 The organization utilizes both formal and informal assessment methods and measures to determine employee well being, employee satisfaction, and motivation.  Assessment findings are linked to performance results to identify priorities for improving the work environment, employee support climate, and the supervisor's effectiveness  (coaching).
Section 5.10 Employee recognition programs are in place for individuals and groups ( may include community service).
Section 5.11 Processes are in place to determine the effectiveness of recruitment and retention programs and to identify areas for improvement.
Section 6.0 PROCESS MANAGEMENT
Effective process management addresses how the facilities organization manages key product and service design and delivery processes. Process management includes various systems such as work management, performance standards, estimating systems, planning and design of new facilities, recruitment and retention programs, and other key processes that affect facilities functions.
100 points
Section 6.1 Processes are in place to ensure that departmental facilities and equipment are adequate for the provision of effective and efficient services.
Section 6.2 An effective work management system is in place to identify, report , correct, and document substandard conditions and maintenance requirements.
Section 6.3

Work authorization and scheduling procedures have been established that are consistent with the identified role of each work unit and achieve an equitable distribution of resources.

Section 6.4

An effective preventive maintenance (PM) program is in place to provide regular inspection and servicing of facilities equipment to assure maximum service life, reliability, and operation.

Section 6.5

An estimating system is used that provides accurate estimates of labor and material requirements in order to plan and schedule the execution of work and to determine the causes of significant deviations between actual costs and estimated costs.

Section 6.6

Design guidelines that incorporate such elements as energy consumption, operating costs, environmental concerns, maintainability, sustainability, accessibility, and safety have been prepared, updated and utilized.

Section 6.7 The delegation of budgetary responsibilities for management of sub-units of the budget is effective in controlling expenditures.
Section 7.0 PERFORMANCE RESULTS
The facility organization's performance as it can be assessed through campus appearance, employee satisfaction and motivation, effectiveness of systems operations, customer satisfaction, financial results, and supplier/business partner results. Where feasible, it is helpful to have measurement tools in place to assess performance in these areas.
250 points
Section 7.1 The appearance of the buildings and grounds is in keeping with the surrounding community and the stated image of the institution.
Section 7.2 The condition and cleanliness of facilities are in keeping with the image and standards adopted by the institution as well as activities associated with its mission and programs.
Section 7.3

Building systems and infrastructure are maintained and operated at a level of reliability that contributes to the successful implementation of the institution's mission and programs.  

Section 7.4 Funding resources are effectively used and are adequate to support a level of facilities maintenance that prevents the deferral of major maintenance and repairs.
Section 7.5

Staff is highly motivated and productive, taking pride in the accomplishment of their duties.

Section 7.6 Customer satisfaction measures ensure that the levels of service are consistent with customer needs and requirements and within the facilities department's capability.
Section 7.7 Managers and supervisors stay in touch with the needs of higher education.
Section 8.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
At the request of the Institutional Representative this section would include any items or subjects that are not covered by the criteria in Sections 1 through 7.  These items may include those things that are specific to the campus.
Points as appropriate

A complete award submission consists of the following parts:

1. Completed application form.

2. An introductory abstract of no more than 200 words.

3. Narrative of no more than five pages each for the eight criteria described below or in this downloadable document.

4. A list of supporting materials for each of the eight criteria. This is simply a listing of the documentation that supports statements made in the narrative. DO NOT INCLUDE THE ACTUAL DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR SUBMISSION. Instead, you should be prepared to make the listed documents available to evaluators during the site visit.

View an excerpt from a sample Award for Excellence submission. A full copy of the sample document can be obtained by contacting your regional representative to the Professional Affairs Committee.

2014
Philadelphia University
Soka University of America
University of Michigan
University of New Mexico
University of North Carolina at Charlotte

2013
Texas Tech University
University of Arizona

2012
Harrisburg Area Community College
Pima Community College
University of Colorado Boulder

2011
No Recipients

2010
Arkansas State University
University of Nevada Las Vegas

2009
Philadelphia University -- View the video (32MB) AVI
University of North Florida -- View the video (33MB) AVI
University of West Georgia -- View the video (29MB) AVI

2008
No Recipients

2007
California State University, San Bernardino -- view the video (18MB)
Harrisburg Area Community College -- view the video (20MB)
North Carolina State University -- view the video (19MB)
University of Central Oklahoma -- view the video (28MB)
Utah State University -- view the video (16MB)

2006
Smithsonian Institution
University of Alabama, Birmingham

University
of Michigan

2005
University of Florida

2004
Emory University
University of Memphis

2003
Iowa State University
University of Maryland, Baltimore

2002
No Recipients

2001
Texas Tech University
University of Cincinnati (OH)
University of Miami (FL)

2000
Duke University (NC)
University of Southern California

1999
East Carolina University (NC)
Georgia State University
Memorial University of Newfoundland

1998
No Recipients

1997
University of Arkansas

1996
Miami University (OH)
University of Toledo (OH)

1995
Griffith University (Australia)
University of Oklahoma
University of Michigan-Housing Division

1994
James Madison University (VA)

1993
Saint Mary's University (TX)
University of Virginia
University of Michigan Housing Division,
Categories: Campus Condition & Appearance, Energy Conservation Programs

1992
No Recipients

1991
Fayetteville State University (NC), Small Campus International Winner
University of California/Berkeley, Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology (Ontario), Large Campus Category
Northern Arizona University, Large Campus Category
South Mountain Community College (AZ), Small Campus Category
University of North Dakota, Large Campus Category
University of Tulsa (OK), Small Campus Category
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Large Campus Category

1990
United States Military Academy (NY), Small Campus International Winner
Texas Tech University, Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
New Mexico Military Institute, Small Campus Category
Rutgers University (NJ), Large Campus Category
Southern College of Technology (GA), Small Campus Category
University of California/Riverside, Large Campus Category
University of Puget Sound (WA), Small Campus Category
University of Tulsa (OK), Small Campus Category
University of Utah, Large Campus Category
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Large Campus Category

1989
Waukesha County Technical College (WI),Small Campus International Winner
Vanderbilt University (TN), Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
California State University/Sacramento, Large Campus Category
The Colorado College, Small Campus Category
Fitchburg State College (MA), Small Campus Category
Mercer University/Atlanta (GA), Small Campus Category
Ohio State University, Large Campus Category
Saint Mary's University (TX), Small Campus Category
Texas Tech University, Large Campus Category
University of California/San Francisco, Small Campus Category
University of Colorado, Large Campus Category
University of Vermont, Large Campus Category

1988
Medical College of Georgia, Small Campus International Winner
Brigham Young University (UT), Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
The Colorado College, Small Campus Category
Georgia State University, Large Campus Category
Michigan State University, Large Campus Category
Rochester Institute of Technology (NY), Large Campus Category
Saint Mary's University (TX), Small Campus Category
University of Idaho, Large Campus Category
University of Maryland/Baltimore, Small Campus Category
University of Oklahoma, Large Campus Category

Sustainability Award

Summary

APPA's Sustainability Award in Facilities Management is designed to recognize and advance sustainability excellence in educational facilities. This is APPA's newest award and is reflective of APPA's "Sustainability Statement" and was introduced for the first time in the 2012 annual award cycle. This award recognizes the facilities management department that has integrated sustainable policies and "green" practices throughout all facets of the organization and embedded them within the educational institution.

Nominations are now being taken for APPA’s 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

The Sustainability Award in Facilities Management is open to any APPA Institutional member. Multi-campus or state systems may submit applications for system-wide or individual merit.

Institutions that wish to be considered for the Sustainability Award in Facilities Management must submit electronic application materials to APPA no later than November 30, 2014.

Final evaluation regarding the Award will be made some time in April/May and will be submitted for approval to APPA's Board of Directors. Award recipients will be recognized at APPA's annual conference banquet in August of the same year. Other sustainable recognition actions will be included to provide additional exposure for the award recipient, including the request for each winning institution to provide the committee with 5 to 15 photos of sustainability practices on their campus.

APPA has developed the criteria below based on specific standards and processes applicable to management in educational facilities.  The categories were developed in collaboration with and support from the research and development work provided by the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE). Their Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Rating System (STARS) offers standards by which educational institutions may measure themselves for recognition of their campus environmental and sustainability achievements. This is a self-reporting framework to gauge the relative progress towards sustainability. The focus of the APPA Sustainability Award is to measure the current level and effort of a facilities management department and the integration with the academic curriculum of the institution. 

Successful applicants will demonstrate the ability to look at the organization as a whole, focus on what is important to the enterprise, with the goal of improving overall performance and leadership in sustainable initiatives.

When addressing the criteria, applicants should emphasize results, creating value, exceeding customer needs, and identifying key linkages. More specific points relate to each of the seven criteria areas provided in the table below or are available for download. Entries are judged on a one thousand (1000) point system based on the four major APPA competencies blended with academic and sustainability performance result elements.

  • Educational Curriculum and Research (100 pts)
  • Leadership and Administration (200 pts)
  • Maintenance and Operations (200 pts)
  • Energy and Utilities (200 pts)
  • Planning and Construction (200 pts)
  • Sustainability Indicators (100 pts)
  • Sustainability Innovations (extra pts)
A single Sustainability Award can be awarded to each of the following categories:

  • K-12 educational institution
  • Community College
  • Small Colleges and Universities
  • Private Institution
  • Public Institution
  • Historically Black Colleges and Universities
  • Military Enterprise  

Sustainability Award: In keeping with the concept of sustainability, the actual award will be represented in the following format;

  • Receive primary feature/exposure with an article in Facility Manager magazine
  • Formal accolades and announcement at the APPA Annual Banquet
  • Formal electronic letters to the executive Leadership at the institution and printed certificates on recycled paper to award recipients.

A complete award submission consists of the following parts:

1. Completed application form.

2. An introductory abstract of no more than 200 words.

3. Narrative of no more than five pages each for the seven criteria described below or available to view in this downloadable document.

4. A list of supporting materials for each of the seven criteria. This is simply a listing of the documentation that supports statements made in the narrative. DO NOT INCLUDE THE ACTUAL DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR SUBMISSION. Instead, you should be prepared to make the listed documents available electronically to evaluators upon request.

PDF

Section number

Credit Title

Possible Points 100

1.0

EDUCATIONAL CURRICULM AND RESEARCH

1.1

An institutional sustainability strategic plan exists that includes goals, objectives and implementation timelines.

1.2

The institution has a sustainability public educational program.

1.3

The institution has a sustainability outreach program for new students, staff, faculty and the local community.

1.4

The institution provides sustainability/environmentally focused courses toward an accredited degree program.

1.5

The institution offers an accredited certificate program in “Sustainability” disciplines.

1.6

The institution offers an accredited degree program in “Sustainability” disciplines.

1.7

The institution offers an accredited graduate program in “Sustainability” disciplines.

1.8

The institution offers undergraduate and graduate “Sustainability” research opportunities.

TOTAL

2.0

LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION

Total Points 200

2.1

The sustainability plan specifically for Facilities Management is in place, current, and utilized for making decisions.

2.2

The Facilities Management sustainability plan was developed with participation from internal and external stakeholders, approved by the institutional administration, and effectively communicated.

2.3

The Facilities Management sustainability plan goals and key performance measures are periodically reviewed and understood by all in the institution.

2.4

A sustainability budget developed by Facilities Management is in place.

2.5

There is continuous staff training & development in sustainability.

2.6

Facilities Management provides leadership in support of the institutional sustainability mission and goals.

2.7

The Facilities Management sustainability plan is integrated and coordinated with other departmental sustainable efforts.

2.8

Sustainable transportation modality for the student population is currently in place and effectively in use e.g. bus system, ride share, zip/smart car rental.

2.9

Sustainable transportation modality for employee, faculty and staff  populations is currently in place and effectively in use e.g. bus system, ride share, zip/smart car rental.

TOTAL

3.0

MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS

The Facilities Management department should anticipate many factors in its Sustainability planning efforts: changing customer expectations, business and partnering opportunities, technological developments, evolving regulatory requirements, and societal expectations.

Total Points 200

3.1

Facilities Management implements the concept of “Total Cost of Ownership and lifecycle investment” for its sustainability efforts.

3.2

Sustainability efforts are included in modernization, planned maintenance, capital renewal and deferred maintenance programs.

3.3

Facilities Management maximizes technology e.g. CMMS, EMS, DDC to support sustainability concepts and principles.

3.4

Sustainability concepts and principles are integrated in the practices, methods and procedures.

3.5

Sustainable grounds maintenance and landscaping practices are established and followed.

3.6

Sustainable integrated pest management program is implemented.

3.7

Sustainable irrigation plan, tracking consumption usage and reduction management, is established and followed.

3.8

Storm water management efforts are established and followed.

3.9

Sustainable custodial practices are established and followed.

3.10

Sustainable waste management and reduction efforts are established and followed.

3.11

A waste management program has been established to divert tonnage of waste from the landfills.

3.12

A waste reduction plan has been implemented for construction and demolition projects.

3.13

The institution has established and developed a comprehensive  waste recycling management program, e.g. materials/rubbish, food, lamps, cardboard.

3.14

A sustainable composting effort is implemented to recycle and regenerate soil supplements.

3.15

A hazardous waste management program is established and followed in coordination with other hazardous waste generators.

3.16

A sustainable fleet management plan for vehicle selection and maintenance is established and followed.

3.17

A sustainable vehicle usage plan has been developed and implemented.

3.18

Facilities management has established and implemented a paperless environment.

3.19

Facilities management has established green standards and specifications for materials and supplies.

TOTAL

4.0

ENERGY AND UTILITY

One of the critical areas for educational institutions is the consumption and utilization of Energy and Utilities. A sustainable plan that incorporates measures to reduce, reuse and recycle energy can be a key component for the overall reduction in demand and supply side of the overall energy utility.

Total Points 200

4.1

The institution has a comprehensive campus Utility Master Plan that incorporates future growth for the demand and supply of energy.

4.2

The institution has a “Climate Action Plan”.

4.3

The institution has conducted a carbon footprint survey.

4.4

The institution has a greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy and plan for implementation.

4.5

The institution has a carbon footprint reduction strategy and plan for implementation.

4.6

The institution has a comprehensive energy management and conservation strategy and plan for implementation.

4.7

The institution has a renewable energy implementation strategy. (e.g. fuel cells, photovoltaic, wind, heat recovery, in ground source heat pump).

4.8

The institution has an energy conservation strategy and plan.

4.9

The institution has an integrated energy management system to control and monitor building energy efficiency.

4.10

Institutional standards and practices have been established and implemented to provide an optimum indoor air environment.

TOTAL

     

5.0

PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION

The Planning and Construction influence on institutional facilities can play a significant role in the area of sustainability. Using sustainable specifications and guidelines such as USGBC, BREEAM and other universally adopted standards is key to establishing efficient construction practices.

Total Points 200

5.1

Sustainable construction standards/specifications have been developed and codified for the building design and construction.

5.2

Sustainable construction standards/specifications have been developed and codified for the building operations and maintenance.

5.3

A sustainable approach using lifecycle cost analysis for selection of project equipment and materials have been developed.

5.4

Sustainable construction standards/specifications have been developed and codified for comprehensive sustainable landscape architecture plans.

5.5

Institution has a design and construction policy adopting a third party sustainability building design standard. (e.g. USGBC, Green Globe, CaGBC, BREEAM).

TOTAL

     

6.0

SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS

Facility Management’s sustainability performance can be assessed through utility bills/financial results, campus satisfaction, effectiveness of systems operations, customer satisfaction, and supplier/business partner results.  Measurement tools should be in place to assess performance in these areas.

Total Points 100

6.1

An effective system for measuring and recording data (e.g. utility) is in place and is used to establish trends, minimize costs, promote energy conservation, and encourage environmental preservation.

6.2

Sustainability benchmarks have been established for comparison purposes.

6.3

Facility Management’s sustainability successes are documented.

6.4

Provide percentage of total square footage of certified buildings (e.g. USGBC, Green Globe, CaGBC, BREEAM).

TOTAL

7.0

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

This section would include any items or subjects that are not covered by the criteria. These items may include sustainable initiatives that are specific to the institution.

Total Points

7.1

Innovation credits

7.2

Innovation credits

TOTAL

TOTAL CREDIT POINTS

1,000

2014
Black Hills State University
North Carolina State University
Penn State University
San Mateo County Community College District
UCLA
University of Rochester

2013
Duke University
Oberlin College
Philadelphia University
University of Colorado/Boulder
University of Iowa

2012
American University
Emory University
University of British Columbia
University of California, Irvine
University of Prince Edward Island

Effective and Innovative Practices

Sponsored by

APPA's Effective & Innovative Practices Award recognizes programs and processes that enhance service delivery, lower costs, increase productivity, improve customer service, generate revenue, or otherwise benefit the educational institution. Award nomination entries must describe either a new program or significant restructuring of an existing program or process. Up to five ranked submissions will be eligible for a cash award sponsored by Sodexo. Winning entries will receive special recognition on both APPA's website and in APPA's Facilities Manager magazine.
Nominations are now being taken for APPA's 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

Projects displaying a high level of innovation and adaptability/transferability for implementation at other schools have the best chance of being favorably ranked.

Up to five ranked submissions will be eligible for a cash award of $4,000, thanks to an ongoing generous sponsorship provided by Sodexo. Winning entries will receive special recognition at APPA's annual conference and in Facilities Manager magazine.

Entries are judged on a point system based on:

  • Institutional Benefit (100 pts)
  • Innovativeness, Creativity, and Originality (300 pts)
  • Portability and Sustainability (300 pts)
  • Management Commitment and Employee Involvement (150 pts)
  • Documentation, Analysis, Customer Input, and Benchmarking (150 pts)

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

  • Purdue University
    Building Services Sustainability Program
  • University of Iowa
    University of Iowa Energy Hawks
  • UNC Charlotte
    Take It or Leave It Tour
  • University of Southern California
    Maintenance Parts and Materials Process Reengineering Case Study
  • California State University, Northridge
    Student Design Team Program

2009


2008

2007

2006

  • Brown University
    Safety Fair
  • Bryn Mawr College
    An Innovative and Collaborative Approach to Storm Water Management
  • Georgia Institute of Technology
    Building Services Customer Achievement Program Award
  • California State University, San Bernardino
    Comprehensive Energy Services Master Enabling Agreement
  • University of British Columbia
    In-Vessel Composting Facility and Organics Collection Program

2005

  • University of British Columbia
    UBC Campus Sustainability Office
    Sustainability Coordinator Program
  • University of Hartford
    Resident Facility Assistant
  • University of Iowa
    Biomass Fuel Project
  • University of Miami
    How the University of Miami's Facilities Administration Department Uses CustomizedFinancial Reports to Manage Costs
  • University of Victoria
    Water Reuse Initiative

Read the 2005 Effective and Innovative Practices Award Summaries in Facilities Manager.

2004

  • Brigham Young University
    Capital Needs Analysis
  • Dallas Theological Seminary
    An Army of One: Multi-Department Development of Custodial Services Training Video
  • Illinois State University
    A Town and Gown Effort That Turns Bulk, Wood Waste Into Savings
  • Penn State University
    Trash to Treasure
  • Queensland University of Technology
    Facilities Condition Audit

Read the2005 Effective and Innovative Practices award applications.

APPA Fellow

Summary

While most awards recognize past achievements, the APPA Fellow designation brings with it both recognition for specific accomplishments to date and expectations for continued involvement in APPA's leadership program through research and mentoring. The Fellow is APPA's highest individual achievement award. Nominees must demonstrate active membership in APPA for a minimum of ten years; graduation from APPA's Institute for Facilities Management; completion of APPA's Leadership Academy; completion of an approved research project under APPA's Center for Facilities Research; authorship of an article submitted for publication by APPA; and submission of two references from colleagues in the educational facilities profession that describe the individual's successes and dedication to the field.

Nominations are now being taken for APPA's 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

While most awards recognize past achievements, the APPA Fellow designation brings with it both recognition of specific accomplishments to date and expectations for continued involvement in APPA's leadership program through research and mentoring.  This is APPA's highest individual achievement award.

In order to be eligible for the designation of APPA Fellow, individuals must:

  • Employee (including Emeritus) of an APPA member institution for ten consecutive years.
  • Complete APPA's Institute for Facilities Management.
  • Complete the APPA Leadership Academy.
    [The Board of Directors may waive attendance of the Institute and/or the Academy if it deems the applicant's body of work and education provides the same standard and quality of experience as attendance at these programs. Applicants should affirmatively request a waiver and supply information on their body of work and education as part of the application process.]
  • Complete a research project under APPA's Center for Facilities Research - CFaR (Presentation of research at a professional facilities conference is encouraged but not required). Projects performed prior to the creation of CFaR must be approved by the existing CFaR Advisory Council.
  • Prepare an article accepted for publication by APPA.
  • Provide two references from colleagues in the educational facilities profession that can speak about your successes and dedication to the educational facilities profession.

Please use the checklist above to ensure that you have satisfied all the necessary requirements for APPA Fellow prior to submitting your application.  Proof of graduation from APPA programs is required (copies of certificates serve as proof) and all applications are reviewed by the Awards and Recognition Committee to ensure that they are complete.  APPA Fellow recipients must be approved by the APPA Board of Directors.  

2014

No recipients

2013

No recipients

2012

William M. Elvey

2011

Jack K. Colby

2010

Maggie Kinnaman
Mohammad H. Qayoumi

2009

Alan S. Bigger

2008

No recipients

2007

No recipients

2006

Christopher K. Ahoy
Donald J. Guckert
Gary L. Reynolds

2005

Edward D. Rice

2004 - Inaugural Recipients

Douglas K. Christensen
William A. Daigneau
Jack Hug

Meritorious Service Award

Summary

Each year, APPA members bestow the Meritorious Service Award upon the individual member or members who have made significant, life-long contributions to the profession of education facilities management. APPA's highest award for individual service, the Meritorious Service Award is given to no more than three individuals each year. Individuals must have been an active member of APPA for a minimum of ten years; attended and participated in meetings and other functions at the international level; and demonstrated continued and distinguished service to the association.

Nominations are now being taken for APPA's 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

To be eligible for the Meritorious Service award, nominees must meet the following criteria:

  1. Employee of an APPA member institution for ten consecutive years. 
  2. Active participation in meetings and other functions at the international level.
  3. Service as an Association officer at the international level through:
    • Service to the Board as a regional or chapter level representative;
    • Service as chair or member of an official APPA Training program or project; and/or
    • Service to an associated professional organization whose principle purpose is related to the betterment of facilities management operations at colleges and universities.
  4. Past recipients can be nominated after ten years of service following their first Meritorious Award.

2014
Marion Bracy
Don Guckert
Tom Harkenrider
Jay Klingel

2013
Dave Button
John P. Harrod, Jr.
Michael R. Johnson

2012
Tony Ichsan
Brian Worley
Mark Hunter

2011
Fred Plant
John Morris
Eakle Barfield, Jr.

2010
Kevin Folsom
Mary Vosevich
Norman Young

2009
Robert J. Carter
Robert S. Hascall
Theodore J. Weidner

2008
Darrel Meyer

2007

Polly Pinney
Sam Polk
Terry Ruprecht

2006
Harvey D. Chace
Cheryl Gomez
Michael Sofield

2005
Philip L. Cox
Vickie D. Younger

2004
Christopher Ahoy
Mohammad H. Qayoumi
Leo Yanda

2003
Alan Bigger
Edward Rice

2002
Jack Colby
Maggie Kinnaman

2001
Greg Fichter
Larry Quick
Joseph Rubertone

2000
Howard A. Wells
Robert A. Getz
Chris Christofferson

1999
James E. Christenson
Sam Ragusa
James O. Roberts

1998
Ron Flinn
John Harrod
Ron Hicks

1997
Thomas F. Vacha
George F. Krell

1996
Patrick Apel
Gary L. Reynolds

1995
Frederick L. Klee
E. Diane Kerby

1994
Norman H. Bedell
William J. Humble
William J. Sharp Jr

1993
W. Clay Adamson
Pieter van der Have
Maurice Pawsey

1992
Douglas K. Christensen
Charles W. Jenkins
G. Thomas Wells

1991
Dean H. Fredericks
Donald L. Mackel

1990
John A. Heinz
Dorsey D. Jacobs
Henry L. Shelby

1989
William A. Daigneau
William S. Mutch
Mohammad H. Qayoumi

1988
Joe J. Estill Jr.
Alan D. Lewis
H.C. Lott Jr.

1987
Herbert I. Collier
G. Don Shepherd

1986
Jack Hug

1985
William D. Middleton

1984
Harold C. Babcock
Paul T. Knapp
Richard C. Neidhard
H. Val Peterson

1983
Rex O. Dillow
William W. Whitman

1982
John K. Armour
Charles W. Butler
Thomas B. Smith

1981
Charles C. Braswell
Sheldon L. Kempton
Philip W. Koehler

1980
William R. Dickson
William S. Gardiner

1979
Harold J. Anderson
William V. Domke
John H. Sweitzer

1978
Eugene Leaver
H. Stanley Palmer

1977
V. Burt Cowman
John Gabe
Henry L. Yeagley Jr.

1976
Charles S. Dawson
John E. Tronoff

1975
Nestus H. Gurley
Philip G. Rector
William M. Stanton Jr.

1974
Lloyd Durow
Peter P. Welanetz
Martin F. Whalen

1973
Gene B. Cross
Gerald P. Hawk
Bruce Rutherford

1972
Calvin C. Greene
George C. Moore
Walter H. Wiegand

1971
Harry M. Bucholz
Harry F. Ebert
Clyde B. Hill

1970
O. Jean Gratton
Richard A. Kendrick
Ted B. Simon

1969
Raymond Halbert
Robert L. Houston
Irwin I. Wright

1968
Elbridge Bacon Jr.
L. Terry Suber
Walter W. Wade

1967
Howard Badgett
Ken Hayter
Francis McGuire

1966
Alva Ahearn
J. McCree Smith
James J. Wenner

1965
Richard Adams
Wilber Zellner

1964
E.T. Clarke
Otto Kohler

1963
Anthony Lazzaro
Roy Lund

1962
Henry Pearson
Carl M.F. Peterson
George Weber

1961
Jack Adwers
M.F. Fifield
R.F. Gingrich

1960
E.J. Behler
Wesley Hertenstein
Walter M. Roth

1959
W.A. Davenport
C.S. Havens
W.P. Wetzel

1958
Sam Brewster
Paul Elleman
A.F. Gallistel

Pacesetter Award

Summary

The Pacesetter Award is designed to encourage participation in APPA among those who have already made significant contributions at their regions or chapters. Up to seven Pacesetter Awards may be given each year.

Nominations are now being taken for APPA’s 2015 institutional and individual awards: Award for Excellence, Sustainability Award, Effective and Innovative Practices Award, APPA Fellow, Meritorious Service Award, and Pacesetter Award. The deadline for consideration for the 2015 awards is November 30, 2014. Awards nominations submitted after November 30, 2014 will be held and considered in the 2016 award cycle.

Complete Application

To be eligible for the Pacesetter Award, nominees must meet the following criteria:

  1. Active member of APPA for a minimum of three years.
  2. Active member of their respective chapter/region for a minimum of five years.
  3. Active participation/contributions/accomplishments in regional/chapter meetings and/or other functions of the International Association:

    Some examples might be…

    – Leadership in the region (i.e. service on a board, hosted a meeting/conference)
    – Leadership in the chapter (i.e. service on a board, hosted a meeting/conference)
    – Leadership on a host committee (i.e. host committee chair position)
    – Leadership in professional development (organized or hosted local/regional/international APPA events, prepared chapter/regional/international APPA educational sessions)
    – Leadership in advancing the organization (assisted with promotion/marketing activities or coordinated membership drives)
    – Authored articles in regional/chapter/national newsletters, the Body of Knowledge (BOK), authored a book, etc.
    – Served as a regional liaison to APPA
    – Served on a APPA Planning Committee for APPA's Annual Meeting
    – Participated in code advocacy related activities or served on the Code Advocacy Task Force
    – Liaison to APPA Board, Committee, or Task Force
    – Other voluntary contributions of time, effort, resources, and leadership abilities to promote and enhance APPA and the educational facilities management profession.

  4. Past recipients cannot be nominated again.

2014
Jerry Carlson
Andrew P. Christ
Dan Park
Steve Peary
Dana Peterson

2013
Bob Andrews
Greg Clayton
Tony Guerrero
Glen Haubold
Chuck Scott
Chris Snow
Lindsay Wagner

2012
Lynne Finn
Brandon Baswell
Richard Davis
Chris Eagan
David Handwork
Sue-Anna Miller
Bob Cornero

2011
John Ott
Rick Storlie
Michael O'Connor
Mike Anthony
Kevin Hansen

2010
Ben Elisondo
Daniel Gearan
Kristie Kowall
Viron Lynch
Juan Ontiveros
Matthew M. Taylor

2009
Scott Burns
Ruthann Manlet
David Millay
John Wong

2008
Jeri King
Terry Major
Bob McMains
Tommy Moss
Willie Suter
Brian Wormwood

2007

James Barbush
Marion Bracy
Ron Brooks
Michelle Estep-Frederick
Clay Shetler
Mark Shively

2006
Mark Hunter
Nancy Hurt
Fred Long
John P. Morris
Arthur E. Sykes
L. Scott Turley
Keith Woodward

2005
Anita Bailey
David Brixen
Harvey Chace
Darrel Meyer
Frederick W. Plant
Jewell Winn

2004
Kevin Folsom
Craig Bohn
Paul Smith
Al Stoverink

2003
J. Annette Bardouille
Robert J. Carter
Neal R. Swarnes

2002
Christopher K. Ahoy
Brooks H. Baker, III
Sam L. Polk
Earl Smith
Tom F. Stepnowski
Mary Vosevich

2001
Robert Bertram
Jeff Buenting
Linda Carter
Terry Ruprecht
L. Wayne White

2000
Don J. Briselden
David A. Cain
Brian Fenn
Donald L. Hufford
Carol Trexler
V. Randall Turpin
Theodore J. Weidner

1999
Vickie DeWitt
Becky Hamilton
Hildo Hernandez
Joseph Kish
Robert Lashaway
Dave Sims

President's Award

Summary

The President's Award is given to individual APPA members who have demonstrated exceptional achievement in facilities management and who have made outstanding contributions to the association.
The President's Award is given at the discretion of the current APPA President.

2014
Members of the Standards and Codes Council: Brooks Baker III, Richard J. Davis, P.E., J.D., Mark Goska, David Handwork, Clint Lord, Dana Peterson, Alan Sactor, Theodore Weidner, John Bernhards

2013
APPA Emerging Professionals: David Cain, Amy Carnahan, Kunal Chitre, Ben Elisondo, James Harrod, John Herrera, Kristie Kowall, Casey Martin, and Lindsay Wagner

APPA Institute Deans: Lynne Finn, Don Guckert, and Jay Klingel

2012
Alan Bigger
Polly Pinney
Dave Button
Kunal Chitre
Michael O'Connor
Suzanne Healy
APPA Regional Relationship Task Force: Mike Johnson, Bill Elvey, J.B. Messer, Chris Kopach, Chuck Scott, Darrel Meyer, Mary Vosevich, Glenn Smith, John Morris, Norm Young, Shelton Riley, William Nelson, Kathleen Schedler, and Larry Blake

2011
Mike Johnson
Lalo Gomez
Melinda Nelson
J.B. Messer
Trilogy Team: Alan Bigger, Tom Becker, Tom Flood, and Casey Wick

2010
David Gray
Joe Metzger
Dan Whitezell
BOK Editorial Team: Maggie Kinnaman, Jack Hug, Bill Daigneau, Darryl Boyce, Gary Reynolds, Anita Dosik and Steve Glazner

2009
Spencer Hall

2008
Chris Ahoy
Jeff Campbell
Jim Haley

2007
Bob Carter
Jack Colby
Reenen du Plessis
Mike Sofield

2006
Brooks Baker
Bill Bell
Rod Rose
Terry Ruprecht

2005
Pat Apel
Charlie and Ann Jenkins

2004
Douglas Erickson
Michelle Estep
James Roberts
Vickie Younger
FMEP Review Team

2003
Sam L. Polk
Center for Facilities Research Advisory Council
Supervisor's Toolkit Task Force

2002
David Cain
Chong Hie Choi
Ted Weidner

2001
Jack Dempsey
Kevin Folsom
William Gardiner
Maragaret Kinnaman
Mo H. Qayoumi

2000
Don Briselden
David Cain
Doug Christensen
Bill Daigneau
Larry Givens
Steve Glazner
Maggie Kinnaman
Tom Harkenrider
Jack Hug
Laura Long
Lander Medlin
Dave Riddell
Pete vander Have

1999
Hod Wells

1998
Cotrenia Aytch
Don Briselden
Don Guckert
Jay W. Klingel
Andria J. Krug
Mohammad H. Qayoumi
Medea M. Ranck
James O. Roberts
Katherine J. Smith
Emily C. Wren

1997
W. Clay Adamson Jr.
Douglas K. Christensen
John P. Harrod Jr.

1996
James O. Cole
Tina Myers
Diana Tringali
Pieter J. van der Have

1995
Patrick H. Apel
Lee and Joan Newman
James and Rose Marie Payne

1994
Gary L. Reynolds

1993
Kenneth Hall
Wayne E. Leroy

1992
Robert A. Getz

1991
Charles W. Jenkins
Walter A. Schaw
Winthrop M. Wassenar

1990
Robert W. Collins

1989
Rex O. Dillow

1988
William D. Middleton

1986
Herbert I. Collier
William V. Domke

Distinguished Leadership and Ethics Award

Summary

This award will be presented to an individual member who has made significant, albeit life-long contributions to the profession of education facilities management and who has demonstrated the principles of ethical leadership in all that he or she does. This individual adheres to the highest ethical standards of honesty, integrity, and consistency. He or she maintains an unwavering commitment to do good, holding steadfast to his/her beliefs, yet is always capable of giving more for the benefit of all. By demonstrating respect for different ideas, teachings, and cultures, this individual is a consummate professional, sought after role model and mentor, and the ultimate ambassador for the entire profession within the education enterprise.

The Distinguished Leadership and Ethics Award is given at the discretion of the current APPA Presidential Triad.

2014
Doug Christensen

Unsung Heroes Award

In 2009, APPA's President Mr. Bill Elvey, created a new set of awards called the "Unsung Heroes" award. Annually, regional presidents are asked to suggest a worthy individual(s) who work tirelessly for their region, chapter, and/or the profession, but whom have gone unnoticed to date and are worthy of receiving an award from the president of International APPA. These individuals are recognized as "unsung heroes" during the Awards Ceremony at the APPA annual conference and further recognized at their regional or state conference the following fall.

Unsung Heroes Awards for 2013

ERAPPA - Dianne Gravatt

CAPPA - Sue-Anna Miller

MAPPA - Jim Hubbard

PCAPPA - Dan Park

RMA - Cloriza Lomeli

Unsung Heroes Awards for 2012:

CAPPA - Mike Miller

ERAPPA - Peter Buchhiet

ERAPPA - Bob Britton

MAPPA - Phyllis Gillis

PCAPPA - Tony Ichsan

RMA - Lisa Potter

SRAPPA - Anthony Yamada

Unsung Heroes Awards for 2011:

CAPPA - Thomas Lee

ERAPPA - Neal Lespasio

MAPPA - David Miller

PCAPPA - Brian Worley

RMA - Erik Van de Boogaard

SRAPPA - Jay Klingel

Unsung Heroes Awards for 2010:

ERAPPA - Bob Britton & Jerry Hill

MAPPA- Christine Douglas

CAPPA - Doug Riat

SRAPPA - Tony Yamada

RMA - Shawna Rowley & Joe Metzger

PCAPPA - none

Unsung Heroes Awards for 2009:

David Gray

Shari Philpott

Phil Rouble

Terry Pellerin

Kris Ackerbauer

Rex Dillow Award for Outstanding Article

Summary

The Rex Dillow Award is presented to the author or authors of the best article published in Facilities Manager magazine during the previous year. Recipients are selected by the Information and Research Committee.

Eligible articles are those written by a full-time employee, from any department, of an APPA member institution. If an article has more than one listed author, all authors must be full-time employees of an APPA member institution to be eligible for the award. Eligible institutions must be Institutional or Affiliate members at the time of publication.

Selection Guidelines
The Information and Research Committee administers the Rex Dillow Award and assesses each of the eligible articles based on the following five categories:

  1. Content the degree to which the article adds to the body of knowledge of the facilities profession through new information, a new perspective on existing information or techniques, or case studies.
  2. Interest the degree to which the article addresses current topics or stimulates interest through its methods of expression.
  3. Readability the degree to which the article conforms to the style and format of the magazine, uses easily understood words and phrases, and provides a logical structure.
  4. Applicability the appeal and value of the article's content to a broad range of educational facilities and other institutions.
  5. Ease of editing reflects the time and effort required by the magazine editor to prepare the submitted article for publication.

Each category is given equal weight in its contribution to the article's overall rating.

 

2014
Richard L. McDermott
Read Alright Already! Let’s Stop Answering the Wrong Question About Deferred Maintenance

2013
Donald J. Guckert and Jeri Ripley King
Read Creating a Shared Context for Value-Based Collaboration & Decision Making

2012
John Cannon
Read Exceeding Expectations

2011
William A. Daigneau
Read Portfolio Based Management

2010
Joe Whitefield
Read Deferred Capital Renewal as a Spoiler for Campus Programs

2009
Frederic J. Gratto
Read Give Me Liberty or Give Me Brick

2008
Kate Van Sant and Patricia Stewart
Read Pandemic Preparation: Hoping for the Best, Preparing for the Worst

2007
William A. Daigneau
Read Megatrends and Myths: Facilities Management Practices in Higher Education

2006
Roger E. Rowe
Read After-Action Reviews: A Process for Continuous Improvement

2005
Leonard Friesenhahn
Read The University of Texas Sewer Rehab: Using Trenchless Technologies

2004
Richard W. Robben
Read Quality Measurement in a Facilities Management Environment

2003
Donald J. Guckert and Jeri Ripley King
Read The High Cost of Building a Better University

2002
Walter K. Simpson
Read A Facilities Manager's Guide to Green Building Design

2001
David Gonzales
Read It Takes a Revolution - A Case Study of Facilities Service Improvements at UCSB

2000
William A. Daigneau
Read Charting the Future: A Research Agenda for APPA

1999
John G. Dempsey and Gretchen Wesenberg
Read The Design Partner

1998
William A. Daigneau
Read Product Based Management

1997
Walter Simpson
Read Environmental Stewardship and the Green Campus

1996
Ksenia Jaroshevish and William Merck
Read Pre-Design Planning

1995
Walter Simpson
Read Recharging Campus Energy Conservation: ESCOs and Demand Side Management at SUNY Buffalo

1994
Harvey H. Kaiser
Read Putting the Facilities Audit to Work

1993
Mark Pastin
Read Power, Influence, and Survival in Difficult Times

1992
James E. Christenson
Read Maintenance Management for the 1990s

1991
Paul Banks and Carolyn Harris
Read The Library Environment and the Preservation of Library Materials

1990
Teresa S. Hargett and Robert C. Osborn
Read Cornell Recycles: A Major University Commitment

1989
William S. Mutch
Read The 1988 Olympic Winter Games: The University of Calgary Involvement

1988
Harvey H. Kaiser
Read Capital Needs in Higher Education

1987
Douglas K. Christensen
Read Integrating Capital Studies Within Physical Plant Operations

Business Partner Award

The Eagle Award is presented to an individual business partner who, on behalf of their company, has found unique and effective ways to partner with APPA on projects, initiatives, and programs to advance the educational facilities field.

Other Business Partner awards are based on the amount of participation per year:

Platinum Award $20,000 or more
Gold Award   between $10,000 and $20,000
Silver Award  between $5,000 and $10,000
Bronze Award    at least $5,000

Award Archives - Past Recipients

2014

Philadelphia University
Soka University of America
University of Michigan
University of New Mexico
University of North Carolina at Charlotte

2013

Texas Tech University
University of Arizona

2012

Harrisburg Area Community College
Pima Community College
University of Colorado Boulder

2011

No Recipients

2010

Arkansas State University
University of Nevada Las Vegas

2009

Philadelphia University -- View the video (32MB) AVI
University of North Florida -- View the video (33MB) AVI
University of West Georgia -- View the video (29MB) AVI

2008

No Recipients

2007

California State University, San Bernardino -- view the video (18MB)
Harrisburg Area Community College -- view the video (20MB)
North Carolina State University -- view the video (19MB)
University of Central Oklahoma -- view the video (28MB)
Utah State University -- view the video (16MB)

2006

Smithsonian Institution
University of Alabama, Birmingham

University
of Michigan

2005

University of Florida

2004

Emory University
University of Memphis

2003

Iowa State University
University of Maryland, Baltimore

2002

No Recipients

2001

Texas Tech University
University of Cincinnati (OH)
University of Miami (FL)

2000

Duke University (NC)
University of Southern California

1999

East Carolina University (NC)
Georgia State University
Memorial University of Newfoundland

1998

No Recipients

1997

University of Arkansas

1996

Miami University (OH)
University of Toledo (OH)

1995

Griffith University (Australia)
University of Oklahoma
University of Michigan-Housing Division

1994

James Madison University (VA)

1993

Saint Mary's University (TX)
University of Virginia
University of Michigan Housing Division,
Categories: Campus Condition & Appearance, Energy Conservation Programs

1992

No Recipients

1991

Fayetteville State University (NC), Small Campus International Winner
University of California/Berkeley, Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology (Ontario), Large Campus Category
Northern Arizona University, Large Campus Category
South Mountain Community College (AZ), Small Campus Category
University of North Dakota, Large Campus Category
University of Tulsa (OK), Small Campus Category
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Large Campus Category

1990

United States Military Academy (NY), Small Campus International Winner
Texas Tech University, Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
New Mexico Military Institute, Small Campus Category
Rutgers University (NJ), Large Campus Category
Southern College of Technology (GA), Small Campus Category
University of California/Riverside, Large Campus Category
University of Puget Sound (WA), Small Campus Category
University of Tulsa (OK), Small Campus Category
University of Utah, Large Campus Category
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Large Campus Category

1989

Waukesha County Technical College (WI),Small Campus International Winner
Vanderbilt University (TN), Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
California State University/Sacramento, Large Campus Category
The Colorado College, Small Campus Category
Fitchburg State College (MA), Small Campus Category
Mercer University/Atlanta (GA), Small Campus Category
Ohio State University, Large Campus Category
Saint Mary's University (TX), Small Campus Category
Texas Tech University, Large Campus Category
University of California/San Francisco, Small Campus Category
University of Colorado, Large Campus Category
University of Vermont, Large Campus Category

1988

Medical College of Georgia, Small Campus International Winner
Brigham Young University (UT), Large Campus International Winner
Regional Winners:
The Colorado College, Small Campus Category
Georgia State University, Large Campus Category
Michigan State University, Large Campus Category
Rochester Institute of Technology (NY), Large Campus Category
Saint Mary's University (TX), Small Campus Category
University of Idaho, Large Campus Category
University of Maryland/Baltimore, Small Campus Category
University of Oklahoma, Large Campus Category

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

  • Purdue University
    Building Services Sustainability Program
  • University of Iowa
    University of Iowa Energy Hawks
  • UNC Charlotte
    Take It or Leave It Tour
  • University of Southern California
    Maintenance Parts and Materials Process Reengineering Case Study
  • California State University, Northridge
    Student Design Team Program

2009

2008

2007

2006

  • Brown University
    Safety Fair
  • Bryn Mawr College
    An Innovative and Collaborative Approach to Storm Water Management
  • Georgia Institute of Technology
    Building Services Customer Achievement Program Award
  • California State University, San Bernardino
    Comprehensive Energy Services Master Enabling Agreement
  • University of British Columbia
    In-Vessel Composting Facility and Organics Collection Program

2005

  • University of British Columbia
    UBC Campus Sustainability Office
    Sustainability Coordinator Program
  • University of Hartford
    Resident Facility Assistant
  • University of Iowa
    Biomass Fuel Project
  • University of Miami
    How the University of Miami's Facilities Administration Department Uses CustomizedFinancial Reports to Manage Costs
  • University of Victoria
    Water Reuse Initiative

Read the 2005 Effective and Innovative Practices Award Summaries in Facilities Manager.

2004

  • Brigham Young University
    Capital Needs Analysis
  • Dallas Theological Seminary
    An Army of One: Multi-Department Development of Custodial Services Training Video
  • Illinois State University
    A Town and Gown Effort That Turns Bulk, Wood Waste Into Savings
  • Penn State University
    Trash to Treasure
  • Queensland University of Technology
    Facilities Condition Audit

Read the2005 Effective and Innovative Practices award applications.

2014

No recipients

2013

No recipients

2012

William M. Elvey

2011

Jack K. Colby

2010

Maggie Kinnaman
Mohammad H. Qayoumi

2009

Alan S. Bigger

2008

No recipients

2007

No recipients

2006

Christopher K. Ahoy
Donald J. Guckert
Gary L. Reynolds

2005

Edward D. Rice

2004 - Inaugural Recipients

Douglas K. Christensen
William A. Daigneau
Jack Hug

2014

Marion Bracy
Don Guckert
Tom Harkenrider
Jay Klingel

2013

Dave Button
John P. Harrod, Jr.
Michael R. Johnson

2012

Tony Ichsan
Brian Worley
Mark Hunter

2011

Fred Plant
John Morris
Eakle Barfield, Jr.

2010

Kevin Folsom
Mary Vosevich
Norman Young

2009

Robert J. Carter
Robert S. Hascall
Theodore J. Weidner

2008

Darrel Meyer

2007

Polly Pinney
Sam Polk
Terry Ruprecht

2006

Harvey D. Chace
Cheryl Gomez
Michael Sofield

2005

Philip L. Cox
Vickie D. Younger

2004

Christopher Ahoy
Mohammad H. Qayoumi
Leo Yanda

2003

Alan Bigger
Edward Rice

2002

Jack Colby
Maggie Kinnaman

2001

Greg Fichter
Larry Quick
Joseph Rubertone

2000

Howard A. Wells
Robert A. Getz
Chris Christofferson

1999

James E. Christenson
Sam Ragusa
James O. Roberts

1998

Ron Flinn
John Harrod
Ron Hicks

1997

Thomas F. Vacha
George F. Krell

1996

Patrick Apel
Gary L. Reynolds

1995

Frederick L. Klee
E. Diane Kerby

1994

Norman H. Bedell
William J. Humble
William J. Sharp Jr

1993

W. Clay Adamson
Pieter van der Have
Maurice Pawsey

1992

Douglas K. Christensen
Charles W. Jenkins
G. Thomas Wells

1991

Dean H. Fredericks
Donald L. Mackel

1990

John A. Heinz
Dorsey D. Jacobs
Henry L. Shelby

1989

William A. Daigneau
William S. Mutch
Mohammad H. Qayoumi

1988

Joe J. Estill Jr.
Alan D. Lewis
H.C. Lott Jr.

1987

Herbert I. Collier
G. Don Shepherd

1986

Jack Hug

1985

William D. Middleton

1984

Harold C. Babcock
Paul T. Knapp
Richard C. Neidhard
H. Val Peterson

1983

Rex O. Dillow
William W. Whitman

1982

John K. Armour
Charles W. Butler
Thomas B. Smith

1981

Charles C. Braswell
Sheldon L. Kempton
Philip W. Koehler

1980

William R. Dickson
William S. Gardiner

1979

Harold J. Anderson
William V. Domke
John H. Sweitzer

1978

Eugene Leaver
H. Stanley Palmer

1977

V. Burt Cowman
John Gabe
Henry L. Yeagley Jr.

1976

Charles S. Dawson
John E. Tronoff

1975

Nestus H. Gurley
Philip G. Rector
William M. Stanton Jr.

1974

Lloyd Durow
Peter P. Welanetz
Martin F. Whalen

1973

Gene B. Cross
Gerald P. Hawk
Bruce Rutherford

1972

Calvin C. Greene
George C. Moore
Walter H. Wiegand

1971

Harry M. Bucholz
Harry F. Ebert
Clyde B. Hill

1970

O. Jean Gratton
Richard A. Kendrick
Ted B. Simon

1969

Raymond Halbert
Robert L. Houston
Irwin I. Wright

1968

Elbridge Bacon Jr.
L. Terry Suber
Walter W. Wade

1967

Howard Badgett
Ken Hayter
Francis McGuire

1966

Alva Ahearn
J. McCree Smith
James J. Wenner

1965

Richard Adams
Wilber Zellner

1964

E.T. Clarke
Otto Kohler

1963

Anthony Lazzaro
Roy Lund

1962

Henry Pearson
Carl M.F. Peterson
George Weber

1961

Jack Adwers
M.F. Fifield
R.F. Gingrich

1960

E.J. Behler
Wesley Hertenstein
Walter M. Roth

1959

W.A. Davenport
C.S. Havens
W.P. Wetzel

1958

Sam Brewster
Paul Elleman
A.F. Gallistel

2014

Jerry Carlson
Andrew P. Christ
Dan Park
Steve Peary
Dana Peterson

2013

Bob Andrews
Greg Clayton
Tony Guerrero
Glen Haubold
Chuck Scott
Chris Snow
Lindsay Wagner

2012

Lynne Finn
Brandon Baswell
Richard Davis
Chris Eagan
David Handwork
Sue-Anna Miller
Bob Cornero

2011

John Ott
Rick Storlie
Michael O'Connor
Mike Anthony
Kevin Hansen

2010

Ben Elisondo
Daniel Gearan
Kristie Kowall
Viron Lynch
Juan Ontiveros
Matthew M. Taylor

2009

Scott Burns
Ruthann Manlet
David Millay
John Wong

2008

Jeri King
Terry Major
Bob McMains
Tommy Moss
Willie Suter
Brian Wormwood

2007

James Barbush
Marion Bracy
Ron Brooks
Michelle Estep-Frederick
Clay Shetler
Mark Shively

2006

Mark Hunter
Nancy Hurt
Fred Long
John P. Morris
Arthur E. Sykes
L. Scott Turley
Keith Woodward

2005

Anita Bailey
David Brixen
Harvey Chace
Darrel Meyer
Frederick W. Plant
Jewell Winn

2004

Kevin Folsom
Craig Bohn
Paul Smith
Al Stoverink

2003

J. Annette Bardouille
Robert J. Carter
Neal R. Swarnes

2002

Christopher K. Ahoy
Brooks H. Baker, III
Sam L. Polk
Earl Smith
Tom F. Stepnowski
Mary Vosevich

2001

Robert Bertram
Jeff Buenting
Linda Carter
Terry Ruprecht
L. Wayne White

2000

Don J. Briselden
David A. Cain
Brian Fenn
Donald L. Hufford
Carol Trexler
V. Randall Turpin
Theodore J. Weidner

1999

Vickie DeWitt
Becky Hamilton
Hildo Hernandez
Joseph Kish
Robert Lashaway
Dave Sims


2014

Members of the Standards and Codes Council: Brooks Baker III, Richard J. Davis, P.E., J.D., David Handwork, Clint Lord, Dana Peterson, Alan Sactor, Theodore Weidner, John Bernhards

2013

APPA Emerging Professionals: David Cain, Amy Carnahan, Kunal Chitre, Ben Elisondo, James Harrod, John Herrera, Kristie Kowall, Casey Martin, and Lindsay Wagner

APPA Institute Deans: Lynne Finn, Don Guckert, and Jay Klingel

2012

Alan Bigger
Polly Pinney
Dave Button
Kunal Chitre
Michael O'Connor
Suzanne Healy
APPA Regional Relationship Task Force: Mike Johnson, Bill Elvey, J.B. Messer, Chris Kopach, Chuck Scott, Darrel Meyer, Mary Vosevich, Glenn Smith, John Morris, Norm Young, Shelton Riley, William Nelson, Kathleen Schedler, and Larry Blake

2011

Mike Johnson
Lalo Gomez
Melinda Nelson
J.B. Messer
Trilogy Team: Alan Bigger, Tom Becker, Tom Flood, and Casey Wick

2010

David Gray
Joe Metzger
Dan Whitezell
BOK Editorial Team: Maggie Kinnaman, Jack Hug, Bill Daigneau, Darryl Boyce, Gary Reynolds, Anita Dosik and Steve Glazner

2009

Spencer Hall

2008

Chris Ahoy
Jeff Campbell
Jim Haley

2007

Bob Carter
Jack Colby
Reenen du Plessis
Mike Sofield

2006

Brooks Baker
Bill Bell
Rod Rose
Terry Ruprecht

2005

Pat Apel
Charlie and Ann Jenkins

2004

Douglas Erickson
Michelle Estep
James Roberts
Vickie Younger
FMEP Review Team

2003

Sam L. Polk
Center for Facilities Research Advisory Council
Supervisor's Toolkit Task Force

2002

David Cain
Chong Hie Choi
Ted Weidner

2001

Jack Dempsey
Kevin Folsom
William Gardiner
Maragaret Kinnaman
Mo H. Qayoumi

2000

Don Briselden
David Cain
Doug Christensen
Bill Daigneau
Larry Givens
Steve Glazner
Maggie Kinnaman
Tom Harkenrider
Jack Hug
Laura Long
Lander Medlin
Dave Riddell
Pete vander Have

1999

Hod Wells

1998

Cotrenia Aytch
Don Briselden
Don Guckert
Jay W. Klingel
Andria J. Krug
Mohammad H. Qayoumi
Medea M. Ranck
James O. Roberts
Katherine J. Smith
Emily C. Wren

1997

W. Clay Adamson Jr.
Douglas K. Christensen
John P. Harrod Jr.

1996

James O. Cole
Tina Myers
Diana Tringali
Pieter J. van der Have

1995

Patrick H. Apel
Lee and Joan Newman
James and Rose Marie Payne

1994

Gary L. Reynolds

1993

Kenneth Hall
Wayne E. Leroy

1992

Robert A. Getz

1991

Charles W. Jenkins
Walter A. Schaw
Winthrop M. Wassenar

1990

Robert W. Collins

1989

Rex O. Dillow

1988

William D. Middleton

1986

Herbert I. Collier
William V. Domke

2013

Donald J. Guckert and Jeri Ripley King
Read Creating a Shared Context for Value-Based Collaboration & Decision Making

2012

John Cannon
Read Exceeding Expectations

2011

William A. Daigneau
Read Portfolio Based Management

20130

Joe Whitefield
Read Deferred Capital Renewal as a Spoiler for Campus Programs

2009

Frederic J. Gratto
Read Give Me Liberty or Give Me Brick

2008

Kate Van Sant and Patricia Stewart
Read Pandemic Preparation: Hoping for the Best, Preparing for the Worst

2007

William A. Daigneau
Read Megatrends and Myths: Facilities Management Practices in Higher Education

2006

Roger E. Rowe
Read After-Action Reviews: A Process for Continuous Improvement

2005

Leonard Friesenhahn
Read The University of Texas Sewer Rehab: Using Trenchless Technologies

2004

Richard W. Robben
Read Quality Measurement in a Facilities Management Environment

2003

Donald J. Guckert and Jeri Ripley King
Read The High Cost of Building a Better University

2002

Walter K. Simpson
Read A Facilities Manager's Guide to Green Building Design

2001

David Gonzales
Read It Takes a Revolution - A Case Study of Facilities Service Improvements at UCSB

2000

William A. Daigneau
Read Charting the Future: A Research Agenda for APPA

1999

John G. Dempsey and Gretchen Wesenberg
Read The Design Partner

1998

William A. Daigneau
Read Product Based Management

1997

Walter Simpson
Read Environmental Stewardship and the Green Campus

1996

Ksenia Jaroshevish and William Merck
Read Pre-Design Planning

1995

Walter Simpson
Read Recharging Campus Energy Conservation: ESCOs and Demand Side Management at SUNY Buffalo

1994

Harvey H. Kaiser
Read Putting the Facilities Audit to Work

1993

Mark Pastin
Read Power, Influence, and Survival in Difficult Times

1992

James E. Christenson
Read Maintenance Management for the 1990s

1991

Paul Banks and Carolyn Harris
Read The Library Environment and the Preservation of Library Materials

1990

Teresa S. Hargett and Robert C. Osborn
Read Cornell Recycles: A Major University Commitment

1989

William S. Mutch
Read The 1988 Olympic Winter Games: The University of Calgary Involvement

1988

Harvey H. Kaiser
Read Capital Needs in Higher Education

1987

Douglas K. Christensen
Read Integrating Capital Studies Within Physical Plant Operations