-
An achievable credit
To earn this credit, implement an occupant comfort survey and a system to collect ongoing feedback on indoor environmental comfort. The credit is readily achievable and can help make your occupants happier.
Cover all the categories
Project teams often make the mistake of using an incomplete survey format that doesn’t include questions covering each required occupant comfort category. To avoid this problem, use a recommended online survey tool or follow someone else’s template—see the Documentation Toolkit and Resources sections for samples.
Corrective action and costs
Costs to develop and distribute the survey will be minimal if you use in-house staff and start with a template, or use an online service that...
Step-by-step credit help
Got the gist of the LEED credit but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Members get:
- Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
- Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
- Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
- Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
- All checklists organized by project phase.
- On-the-fly suggestions on useful items from the Documentation Toolkit, Resources, and Credit Language.
-
Credit language straight from USGBC
Need to check up on the exact LEED credit language from the LEED Rating System on the fly? LEEDuser includes the verbatim language. Members get:
- Easy access to the official LEED credit language with just a couple of clicks.
- On the jobsite without your bulky LEED Reference Guide? Check up on the credit language details here.
- Credit language content is used by permission of the U.S. Green Building Council.
Your credit-by-credit reference library
Why waste time chasing down referenced standards and supporting resources when LEEDuser links you directly to the ones you need? LEEDuser has gathered all the best tools out there and organized them by credit for easy reference. Members get links to:
- Organizations that can give information or help on a credit.
- Standards or studies that are key reference points for credits and prerequisites.
- Articles that help explain important topics.
- Key documents or references for credit inputs.
- Software tools you can use to run calculations or simulations.
Documentation Toolkit
In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:
- Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
- Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
- Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
- Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
- Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
- Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.
Sign in for complete access
Not a member yet? LEEDuser membership gives you access to all credit tips, checklists, documentation samples, and more.
Monthly Individual Membership (auto-renews):
Access to all content, cancel anytime—$9.95/month
Annual Individual Membership (auto-renews):
Access to all content, cancel anytime—$99.95/year
Annual Team Membership:
Access for up to 10 members—$349.95/year





34 Comments
Define Occupant
It says that for a "commercial building, regular building occupants are defined as workers who either have a permanent office or workstation or typically spend a minimum of 10 hours per week in the project building. So, what about the students that have all their classes and discussions in our Classroom and Office Building and amount to 10 hours a week? Do I have to include students?
Ashley, I don't think LEED has a specific definition of occupant, but I think it's expected that you would include the students in a case like this, assuming they are old enough to be effective participants in survey like this.
FTE?
Hi there,
I just wanted to confirm that for this particular credit we don't need to use FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories.?
We have a small staff here - 18 total staff members, only 6 of whom are full-time. Our FTE comes to 10.75, and we received 11 responses for the survey. Are we ok?
Thanks for your feedback.
I have a similar question. On PI Form 3, Occupant and Usage Data, our average occupancy from Table PIf3-2 is 77%. Do we use 77% of our FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. to account for the percentage of survey respondents? That is, if our FTE is 120 and the percentage from the table is 77%, are we required to provide at least 120 x 0.77 = 92.4 x 0.30 = 28 responses to the survey? Or, are we required to provide 120 x 0.30 = 36 responses?
Thanks.
John, you should be fine with 11 responses since that is more than 30% of your total staff members. When you document this credit, just be sure to indicate the number of people that are considered regular occupants; defined as people with a permanent workstation and who typically spend at least 10 hours/week in the project building.
Cynthia, PIf3-2 accounts for the percent of the building that is occupied, not the percentage of FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. that are regular building occupants. Therefore, I don't think it is appropriate to use the average occupancy of 77%. If all 120 occupants are full time employees, then use the FTE number of 120, requiring 36 responses.
Ok. Here's the problem. During the performance period the owner opened up the last remaining floor raising the FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. count from 100 to 120. The occupant comfort survey had been done before that, with 30 responses gathered. It may not be a big deal to get 6 more people to fill out the survey before the end of the performance period...but if it is, will this explanation be acceptable to USGBC ?
Cynthia, the survey must be conducted at one time, so acquiring 6 more responses well after the original survey was administered is not allowed. However, I would use the FTE number of 100 in the LEED template, since that was the correct FTE count on the date that the survey was conducted. Just be sure to write an explanation of why the number of regular building occupants for this credit is lower than the FTE number of 120.
How Anonymous?
We conducted an on-line occupant survey that generated 444 replies (30.8% of FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories.). We acheived this rate by offering to put the respondent's name into a drawing for a $100 gift certificate.
The GBCI review team rejected our documentation for this credit since they weren't "anonymous" and wants us to perform a revised survey. It is extremely unlikely we will achieve the 30% threshold without this "prize". Any ideas on how we can move forward?
We have had success in the past by doing a paper survey (I know- not very green!) where people get a raffle ticket when they turn their surveys in in -person. This protects the anonymity of the survey while still allowing an incentive.
Tim - Was including one's name with the survey mandatory? Or was there an option where an occupant could respond to the survey without including their name (even if that meant not being eligible for the prize)? If including a name was mandatory, I think you're stuck and will have to redo the survey as they request. The problem being that if I have to include my name, I may be less likely to be honest about complaints or problems than if I were allowed to be anonymous. However, if including the name was optional to get entered in the drawing, you absolutely should be OK. Allowing folks to trade their anonymity for a prize still assures individuals who are unhappy about building conditions with an avenue for responding honestly if they so desire. It's obviously not perfect, but I really think GBCI could live with that given the reality of how difficult achieving the required response actually is - I've been amazed at how many of my projects struggle to achieve 30% even with an incentive like the one you employed. This credit ends up being a much tougher undertaking than it appears on its face.
I hope this helps a bit.
Dan
Catch-22?
We are working on TAIPEI 101--2 million SF and over 100 tenants--as an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project and have conducted an extensive survey with over 3,500 responses, which is > 30% of the building tenants. We have also pinpointed many of the causes of the temperature complaints, which result from some of the tenants' interior designers locating ALL of the thermostats for a multi-thousand square foot floorplate on ONE wall tucked away where no one can see them! (They're ugly...don't you understand?) Anyway most of these tenants won't let the building relocate the thermostats or undertake any measures to improve the acoustics, effectively rendering their options zero. The Reference Guide states that "pinpoint[ing] the problem" can be considered a "corrective action". We're planning on asserting that by sharing the results with the office managers and offering to help fix the problem that we've "corrected" the issue. Has anyone encountered a similar issue and received specific guidance from GBCI/their reviewer?
Rob- I have not run into that situation before (thankfully the corrections I've had to do on projects have been pretty minor), so I unfortunately do not have any guidance specifically from GBCI. Since it sounds like you can't really do any more than you have already done, I would recommend that you just submit the documentation including the steps you have supplied above and see if it gets accepted.
'Corrective action' is loosely defined - I think the expectation is simply that you take meaningful steps that you think will remedy the problem. It doesn't require massive changes or investment, and sometimes simply explaining the situation and helping occupants or tenants adapt to it is enough. But there is some obligation to make a sincere effort to fix the situation that resulted in occupant discomfort. I think your description is likely to meet that requirement, especially if you can show what exactly your offer to help represents.
Timeframe
I am working on a survey that I would like to provide our tenants with one time per year. With the performance period requiring everything to end within a 30 day window, what have or what is suggested as far as a time frame to handing out/ collecting/ documenting/ corrective action. The minimum performance period is 3 months, would providing the survey November 1st, collecting the survey results November 7th, documenting the results for 1 weeks then, taking corrective action hopefully all are minor adjustments that could take 1 week, what would I do for the next 2 months?
My experience with this is that as long as the survey was conducted during the performance period (maximum of two years, as you'll recall, for individual credits), you are fine. I usually recommend that my projects take care of this survey well before the 3-month shared performance period so we have plenty of time for corrective action. Better to survey early and make improvements early than waiting until the PP and rushing through either aspect.
Great answer Dan. The real thing to remember is that while all credits have to be attempted during the performance period, not all of them will take the entire period to complete.
scale for survey
Is it mandatory to take the survey on a seven point scale ?.The survey we conducted for our project is on a five point scale.Can the results from that survey be used for this credit?Please advise.
The credit implementation language is pretty clear that you need to use the -3 to +3, seven point scale. Since it sounds like you have already done the survey using a 5 point scale, you could try submitting the results you have to see if they would accept it, but they could certainly choose not to.
Hi,
What if there are different Temperature and relative humidity setpointsSetpoints are normal operating ranges for building systems and indoor environmental quality. When the building systems are outside of their normal operating range, action is taken by the building operator or automation system. throughout the project (a manufacturing building, for example, and considering that the building includes administration, warehouse and manufacturing areas are part of the project?
If you have different setpointsSetpoints are normal operating ranges for building systems and indoor environmental quality. When the building systems are outside of their normal operating range, action is taken by the building operator or automation system., such as in a warehouse, you may have trouble meeting the requirements of IEQc7.1, which include complying with ASHRAE 55. Since IEQc7.1 is required in order to achieve 7.2, you may have a problem with this credit. If you can meet ASHRAE 55 throughout than your survey should cover all employees no matter where they work within the building.
Two Surveys
Does it make sense to conduct the survey twice. Once prior to the performance period and then during the performance period for credit compliance.
My concern is that if a lot of problems are revealed by the survey during the performance period, there might not be enough time to correct them.
It also seems more efficient to find out any issues with the HVAC system early so they can remedied along with other work on the ventilation system.
It could be costly to have the HVAC contractor work on the system to comply with other LEED credits, only to have to return again because the survey revealed occupants in an area weren't comfortable, and fix it within the 3 month window!
Geoffrey- two surveys may make sense under certain conditions. However, I personally would be hesitant to do two surveys because if your building is large with multiple tenants or a large number of employees, it may be difficult to get the required 30% survey response rate once, much less twice. Also, keep in mind that the required corrective actions (if any) are likely to be pretty minor such as checking and adjusting temperature setpointsSetpoints are normal operating ranges for building systems and indoor environmental quality. When the building systems are outside of their normal operating range, action is taken by the building operator or automation system. or diffuser airflows or adding tasklights or perhaps window shades- not wholesale changes to the systems. If you craft your survey in a way that allows you to identify specific problem areas, these adjustments may also only be necessary in very small areas of the building, which typically makes them very easy to accomplish during the performance period.
We actually have a relatively small office (less than 100 people). They aren't all minor. I was looking at some of the questions from the CBE and one of them is about cubicle and furnishing comfort. What if it turns out that half the office is dissatisfied with their chairs or cubicles. That could be an expensive fix if we have to replace all the chairs for example.
You've got the make the call for your specific project. Do you think it's likely that a lot of people are dissatisfied? Is occupant comfort a high priority? If so, your conservative approach may be justified.
Geoff - I would also note that furniture comfort is not a required area of the survey for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. compliance. The CBE survey is fantastic and quite comprehensive, but goes beyond EBOM requirements in a number of ways. And I agree with both Allison and Tristan - in most instances two surveys are not necessary, but in all instances where surveys are part of EBOM the user has to assess the likelihood that they will get favorable results with an initial survey and the possibility that the survey will reveal substantial room for improvement that may need to be confirmed with a follow-up survey. Final note - remember that your performance period can be extended backward up to 2 years. So if you conduct your survey within 21 months before the shared 3-month PP for other credits, if the result is good, you're done. If not, you have plenty of time to make changes and re-survey.
I had recently thought of you last point. That given our option to choose the length of the performance period, we could have up to two years to remedy any issues. Thank you guys.
Survey Both Staff & Patrons??
IF your project is a public library, do you need to survey both the staff AND the patrons? If you do, do you need to develop a separate survey for each group to cover potentially different portions of the building? What measure will constitute 30% of the patrons (in a day? in a week? in a month?)
For building types where you have a lot of transient visitors (i.e. libraries, hotels, museums), your survey must only be distributed to the regular building occupants (e.g. full-time employees and/or staff). In your case, library patrons may be excluded from the survey, but it may be helpful to provide an additional narrative that describes any initatives or strategies that have been implemented to reduce conventional commuting for your patrons as well.
hi Jason,
i also looking for an answer, as i working a LEED project for a hotel here. in this case, my survey form is only applicable for the hotel staff only and not the hotel customer, right?
James- that's correct. You only need to survey the staff as guests are transient visitors.
I got the same question about staff and patrons... I got a campus that has 800 staffs and 6000 students... Am'i suppose to survey only the staff ? Because the definition of regular occupants define that the occupants have a permanet workplace or is more than 10 hours per week in the building. Students don't have a permanent workplace but come at least 20 hrs per week. For sure its more realist to survey only the staff ...
Thank you for your help !
Benoit, as with the other situations discussed above, you only need to survey staff. Some narrative about how you are paying attention to comfort for students would also help but shouldn't be required.
Occupant Comfort Levels
Will it be sufficient enough to conduct the survey and to document it to obtain this credit..Does it require to invest on equipments to improve the air quality as most probably we are not planing on going for the credits that are in need of large investments to achieve..
It depends on how your building performs in the survey. If the survey results show that more than 20% of respondents are dissatisfied with a particular aspect of building comfort (such as indoor air quality), you must take corrective actions during the performance period. See the Documentation Toolkit for an example of how to document this.
Please register to use the forum.