當醫院為分散型的醫療機構時，每個獨立分院區都會提出各自的年度整建預算給總院。因此總院會面臨到整建方案數量很多、整建預算有限、哪些方案該被執行等問題。然而目前多院區醫院大多採用平均分配預算給各分院長，再由各院長決定所要整建的方案。在這樣的決策模式下，本研究發現既有的決策方法缺乏對醫院整體發展目標的考量及未客觀評估整建方案之實質效益。因此本研究之目的是提出一個「多院區最佳整建方案評選」之DEA決策分析方法。接著以台北市立聯合醫院為例，示範操作過程。本研究採用之研究方法為文獻回顧法、資料包絡分析法、問卷調查等方法來達成研究目的。研究透過文獻回顧發現資料包絡分析法是利用組織的投入多少資源與組織產出多少貢獻的相對關係，來評估組織的效益，具有解決本研究方案評選效益問題的特性。進而提出多院區最佳整建方案評選之DEA決策分析方法之操作流程，在過程中藉由訪問院長、各分院長、設施管理部門主任及建築專家定義了一個投入項目及十個產出項目來評估整建方案的實質效益。經由相關係數分析，本研究以整建方案投入經費當作投入項目，提升院形象、推展醫療教研及訓練、使用人數與提高公共安全四個項目當作產出項目來評估整建方案。最後以台北市立聯合醫院三個院區，22個整建方案共49,717,262元預算為實際操作對象，評選出具效益的整建方案。本研究認為資料包絡分析法更能考慮到醫院的整體發展目標以及更客觀的評估醫院整建方案之實質效益。

Large-scale hospital organizations continually struggle with problems related to allocating their funds to various competing refurbishment projects. Projects selection is at the heart of these issues because there are always more refurbishment projects than money available, so choosing the most benefit refurbishment projects to whole development of the hospital is important. Through the document review that is the refurbishment project selection. This paper presents a new model within the data envelopment analysis framework for prioritizing refurbishment projects. The criteria used to judge the importance of projects are the inputs and outputs of the model, to help the hospital to select the best benefit refurbishment projects. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the suitability of the decision analysis methods of projects selection, and to establish a set of decision analysis methods of the best benefit of refurbishment projects selection of the hospital. Finally, the new model is tested on a real case - Taipei city hospital to prioritize refurbishment projects at a large-scale hospital organization. It use DEA software operation, and to select the best benefit refurbishment projects of the hospital development.

1.Anne, D.H. and Ann, J.T. (1999). “A Practical R&D Project-Selection Scoring Tool.”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 46(2).
2.Banker, R.D., A. Charnes and W.W. Cooper. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.”, Management Science, 30, 1078-1092.
3.Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper. and E. Rhodes. (1978). “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units.”, European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444.
4.Cheng, E.W.L. and Li, H. (2004) “Exploring quantitative methods for project location selection.”, Building of environment, 39, 1467-1476.
5.Cook, W.D. and Green, R.H. (2000). “Project prioritization: a resource-constrained data envelopment analysis approach.”, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 34(2), 85-99.
6.Daiva, R. (2004). “The Use of Data Envelopment Analysis for Selection of Investment Objects.”, EKONOMIKA..
7.Farell, M.J. (1957). “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency.”, Journal of Royal Statistical Society,” 120, 253-581.
8.Gad, V., Shai, R. and Stuart, S. (2006). “Using data envelope analysis to compare project efficiency in a multi-project environment.”, International Journal of Project Management, 24, 323-329.
9.Green, R.H., Doyle, J.R. and Cook, W.D. (1996). “Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation.”, European Journal of Operational Research, 461-472.
10.Moon, T.H. and Sohn, T.K. (2005). “Intelligent approach＋ for effective management of governmental funds for small and medium enterprises.”, Expert Systems with Applications, 29(3), 566-572.
11.Shroff, H.F.E., Gulledgt, TH.R., Haynes, K.E., O’neill, M. K. (1998). “Setting Efficiency of Long-term Health Care Facilities”, Socio-Economic Planning Science, 32(1), 25-43.
12.Sohn, S.Y., and Moon, T.H. (2004). “Decision Tree based on data envelopment analysis for effective technology commercialization.”, Expert Systems with Application, 26(2), 279-284.
13.Sowlati, T., Paradi, J.C. and Suld, C. (2005). “Information systems project prioritization using data envelopment analysis.”, Mathematical and Computer Modeling, 41(11-12), 1279-1298.
14.Takamura, Y. and Tone, K. (2003). “A comparative site evaluation study for relocating Japanese government agencies out of Tokyo.”, Socio-Economic Planning Science, 37(2), 85-102.
15.高強、黃旭男、Toshiyuki Sueyoshi(2003) 管理績效評估：資料包絡分析法。台北：華泰文化。
16.薄喬萍（2005)績效評估之資料包絡分析法。台北：五南圖書。
17.簡禎富（2005）決策分析與管理─全面決策品質提升之架構與方法。台北。雙葉出版社。
18.孫遜（2004）資料包絡分析法—理論與應用。台北。揚智文化。
19.台北市立聯合醫院網頁。http://www.tpech.gov.tw/index.aspx