A 259-bed, acute-care hospital with multiple complex specialties was facing a growing patient population that was straining existing capacity. Two specialties, cancer and cardiovascular, had outgrown their facilities. Cardiovascular services were significantly undersized and located on the opposite side of campus from the ED and surgery, causing significant travel for highly time-contingent patients. Existing cancer services were not contiguous and lacked ease of access for the quantity of patients seeking care. Medical oncology was in a separate building down the street, while radiation oncology was tucked in a back corner of the acute campus with no room for expansion due to unusable terrain. An internal expansion to accommodate growth or equipment replacement would displace existing imaging modalities and push cancer services into the oldest structure of the facility.
The Catalyst team developed a strategic facility master plan to recommend operations and design strategies to increase patient capacity.
Catalyst proposed that cancer services be offered off-site from the acute campus due to patient needs, growth projections, and physical campus restrictions. This would allow for additional capacity on-site for services that would need coupling with procedural and inpatient areas and be most appropriate for the area’s demographic and market while also offering an opportunity to build all cancer services together in one new building.
Catalyst recommended organizing the campus with complex, high-acuity, and inpatient services co-located in one zone, including diagnostic and treatment areas with clear expansion zones for long-term campus viability.
Inpatient services could be expanded in two shelled units of the newest building so that older beds could be decommissioned. Catalyst proposed creating additional inpatient capacity through a dedicated observation unit that would be located adjacent to the ED rather than on an existing inpatient unit. This would enable synergies in operations between the ED oversight of these patients while locating them in a cost-appropriate design.
The proposed architectural solutions were scheduled to be implemented at a cost of $240 million over a five-year period.