Percentage of time the active thermostat setpoint matched the corporate policy for that zone and schedule. Measures operational discipline — whether the system is being operated as agreed — not whether the space reached a particular temperature.
The percentage of time during the analysis period that the setpoint configured in the thermostat or controller matched the corporate setpoint policy defined for that specific equipment and zone. It measures operational discipline — whether the system is being operated as agreed — not whether the space reached a particular temperature.
An important distinction: Setpoint compliance is fundamentally different from temperature compliance. A unit can have perfect setpoint compliance but poor temperature compliance if the equipment is undersized. Conversely, a unit can have low setpoint compliance but acceptable space temperatures if the equipment overcompensates. Both metrics are needed to get a complete picture.
The general approach is to compare the active setpoint reading reported by the thermostat at each interval against the corporate policy value expected for that equipment, zone, and time of day. Intervals where the active setpoint falls within the defined policy range are counted as compliant.
Setpoint compliance = compliant intervals / total intervals × 100
This requires that the corporate setpoint policy is clearly defined and stored in the system for each equipment-zone combination before the metric can be calculated.
This metric only has meaning if a corporate setpoint policy has been defined and agreed upon with the client. The policy must specify, at minimum: the cooling setpoint range for daytime operation, the range for nighttime or reduced-load operation, the heating setpoint range where applicable, and the schedule that defines when each applies.
Setpoints vary by zone and schedule within a single client. Common examples: sales floor vs. back-of-house, zones with different operating hours, spaces with different thermal loads, and sites in different climate zones with regionally adjusted policies. Applying a uniform policy across all zones will produce misleading compliance readings.
| Compliance level | Classification | Typical action |
|---|---|---|
| ≥ 90% | Compliant | No action required; include in MBR trend |
| 75 – 90% | Watch zone | Flag for monitoring; investigate if sustained over 2 months |
| < 75% | Non-compliant | Diagnose and escalate per action guide below |
Reference thresholds only. Portfolio compliance target (default: 85% of sites compliant) to be agreed with each client.
Setpoint Compliance is one of the four HVAC optimization metrics Keedian tracks. The table below shows how moving this metric impacts each of the four customer value drivers the product is designed to improve. These are the same four levers expressed on every HVAC product page as Expected Outcomes — the metric pages explain the mechanism; the product pages express the magnitude.
| Value driver | Impact strength | How Setpoint Compliance moves this lever |
|---|---|---|
| Energy savings | Direct, primary | Every degree of unauthorized override — typically colder in summer or warmer in winter to satisfy local discomfort — costs energy. Setpoint Compliance is the cleanest measurement of override-driven waste and, alongside schedule discipline, one of the two largest controllable HVAC energy levers. Reverting overrides directly reduces kWh. |
| Avoided truck rolls | Indirect | Not a direct equipment-failure signal, but persistent override patterns often mask underlying capacity or DeltaT issues that would eventually drive a comfort dispatch. Investigating the reason for low compliance — not just reverting the setpoint — catches the root cause early. |
| Asset lifespan | Indirect, modest | Aggressive overrides force the system to run longer and harder than the design point, accelerating compressor wear and start-stop cycling. Restoring corporate setpoints removes that excess duty. |
| Customer experience | Direct | Corporate setpoints are calibrated to deliver the brand-standard comfort experience for shoppers and customers. Personal-preference overrides by store staff push the space away from that designed experience and typically make it less comfortable for the actual customer — a manager-on-duty who feels warm may drop to 68°F in summer, but shoppers in street clothes find it cold. Restoring compliance restores the intended CX. The genuine exception worth investigating: a site where the corporate setpoint is wrong because of local climate, layout, or occupancy — those cases warrant a setpoint policy update, not just a revert. |
The table below summarizes the principal alarms that fire directly from Setpoint Compliance. Each row links to the full operational detail (trigger, preconditions, action plan, human role, linked SOPs) in the SOPs catalog. These are single-metric alarms only — composite FDD that combines multiple metrics with control state and weather context will appear in a future release.
| Alarm | Description | Severity | Tier | AI executes? | Value drivers | SOP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Setpoint out of corporate range | Current setpoint is outside the tolerance range around the corporate setpoint policy for the zone and time of day. | Medium | Essential | Yes | Energy savings · Customer experience | Open SOP → |
Roadmap: rolling site-compliance KPI (% of time in compliance over a daily/weekly window) — currently surfaced as a dashboard metric rather than an alarm. Composite alarms in development (multi-metric FDD): comfort masked by override (correlation with Temperature Compliance), capacity vs load mismatch.
The action plan for each alarm lives on its own SOP page in the SOPs catalog — with the diagnostic steps, human role, value drivers, and escalation criteria specific to that alarm. The list below maps each setpoint-derived alarm to its SOP; this page keeps only the cross-alarm items that don't belong to a single SOP (policy definition errors, systemic patterns).
If the corporate setpoint policy itself is wrong (zone or schedule miscoded, daypart exception missing, holiday calendar stale), the entire compliance metric is unreliable. Correct the zone and schedule configuration in the system to reflect the actual agreed policy. Recalculate compliance for the affected period if possible and document the correction. Validate any policy change with the client before applying.
If low compliance appears across a large number of sites simultaneously, the most likely cause is a policy definition error in the system rather than widespread per-site overrides. Escalate internally before communicating to the client — confirm the policy definition is current, then propose a coordinated correction. Do not treat as a fleet of independent SOP firings.
Per-alarm escalation criteria live in the Escalation block of each SOP in the SOPs catalog. The patterns below are metric-level — they are read from the portfolio view, not from any single alarm firing, and don't belong to a single SOP.
Escalation criteria and communication protocols should be defined as part of the operational agreement with each client. The guidelines below are a general reference and should be adapted to the specific terms, SLAs, and relationship dynamics in place for each account.
Percentage of time the active thermostat setpoint matched the agreed corporate policy for each zone and schedule. Measures operational discipline — not whether comfort was achieved. Requires a fully defined setpoint policy per zone to be meaningful. Low compliance typically indicates override activity, scheduling misconfiguration, or a policy definition gap. Reviewed monthly in MBR.
SOPs linked to this metric will be documented here. Each SOP will describe the step-by-step operational procedure for a specific scenario identified in the Alarms and Actions sections above.