Facility Condition Assessment –If You’re Not Doing it You Should Be! Al Erdman - Central Texas College

What is a Facility Condition Assessment? (FCA) An Facility Condition Assessment is a process whereby a qualified group of trained industry professionals performs an analysis of the condition of a group of facilities. The industry professionals are typically engineers of various disciplines and skilled-trade technicians, but architects are sometimes used as well. This analysis can vary by the level of detail that is collected, but typically results in a projection of funds that would need to be invested to bring the inventory of buildings up to some pre-determined level of condition and maintain them at that level of condition.

Why a Facility Condition Assessment? CTC has 48 buildings dating back to 1967 totaling nearly one million square feet (not including buried infrastructure, parking lots, sidewalks, etc.) 33 of those buildings (69%) are over 30 years old – most of the infrastructure is that old as well Need to practice Strategic Asset Management (a planned and proactive approach capable of identifying, tracking, and forecasting facility needs) to maximize: Student satisfaction Staff and faculty utilization Prevention of major system failures Protection of taxpayer investment An FCA provides a basis for Strategic Asset Mgmt.

Strategic Asset Management ASSETS MISSION VALUE On Campus & Distance Learning Student Housing Retail Food Service Other Economics Safety Environmental Security Quality of Education Buildings Utilities CONDITION RISK Pavement Other Assets

Goals for the CTC FCA To document, via independent appraisal, current condition, deferred, and required maintenance, to bring our facilities to an agreed upon condition level. Based on the desired condition, to forecast and budget adequate funding to address our facilities’ short term and long term capital needs. To provide a prioritized annual summary (typically up to 10 years) of capital needs based on criticality of individual facilities and of systems (i.e. HVAC systems versus carpeting) requiring capital outlay. To ensure that the conditions of our facilities support our educational mission and strategic plan, protect the investment by our taxpayers, and meet current accreditation requirements.

Detailed Capital Planning Capital assets deteriorate and fail by components and systems, not as a whole Decisions on maintenance and cyclic component renewal events drive asset life Lack of maintenance will greatly reduce typical life of individual components Less Than 10 Years 12 to 20 Years 25 to 50 Years Over 50 Years Interior Finishes Building Envelope Mechanical Electrical Plumbing Elevators Structure Foundation 8 Year Cycle Events 15 Year Cycle Events 30 Year Cycle Events Steady State Events 6

Overview of the FCA Process Budget & 10-Year Capital Plan FCA On-Site Client Workshops FCA Analysis Capital Planning Kickoff Meeting Schedule Fieldwork ”rules” Fieldwork Align Mission, Vision & values Prioritization College Staff Utilization Data Analysis Draft and Final Reports Commentary & Pictures Funding Strategy Optimization Model Scenario Analysis Closeout Feedback Loops Quality Assurance 7

Process Summary DATA INTEGRATION KNOWLEDGE DECISIONS ANALYSIS

Benchmark Used - Facility Condition Index (FCI) Total Cost of Maintenance Requirements FCI = Replacement Cost of the Facility Where: Cost of Maintenance Requirements = Deferred maintenance plus maintenance required within the next five years Facility Replacement Cost = Cost to replace facility in kind. Determined by building type. Based on annual evaluation of construction costs by building type determined typically by RS Means data. So: The higher the FCI, the poorer the condition of the facility. A Facility Condition Index (FCI) compares the $ amount of the requirements to the replacement value for each asset. The higher the FCI, the poorer the condition of the facility is relatively. For example, if an asset with a replacement value of $1,000,000 has $100,000 of existing requirements; the FCI is $100,000/$1,000,000 or 0.10. This principle can be expanded to cover groups of assets or an entire campus. The FCI ranges for the standards of service are: 0.00 to 0.05 – Very Good (optimal level) 0.051 to 0.010 – Good 0.011 to 0.015 – Fair 0.0151 and higher - Poor Kaiser’s FCI has been configured in line with industry standards to include: Categories: Building/Regulatory Code, Life Safety, Air/Water Quality, Other Environmental Hazards, Obsolescence, Appearance, Integrity Only appearance is not typically included in the industry standard FCI, however, as appearance in the case of hospital buildings includes finishes which are critical to the ability to deliver appropriate care to patient areas, they were deemed to be required in the calculation of FCI in this case. Priorities: Near Term Priorities 1, 2 and 3 (mid term are excluded) The requirement’s recommended action date occurs in the past, the current fiscal year, and five year in the future fiscal year. Kaiser’s FCI includes near term requirements P1- P3 in line with industry standards.

Facility Condition Index Prioritization of Findings 2 1 Prioritization 4 3 Facility Condition Index Allows for a prioritized plan for maintenance to ensure that facilities and infrastructure are in place when needed to enhance accomplishment of the CTC mission.

Value/Benefits of an FCA Document why funding for maintenance is needed, especially significant capital improvements Prioritize resources according to College mission Predict effects and consequences of decisions to ensure mission readiness Identify maintenance requirements for increased reliability Enhance operational efficiency Improve customer/user satisfaction Document accreditation compliance related to system performance Lower overall operational costs Value proposition differs with every client

Boards will Jump on This Idea, Right? Need to anticipate Board objections Everything on campus looks good (or we don’t need a bunch of expensive outside consultants to tell us what rooms need to be painted) We haven’t had a catastrophic failure so far Nobody is screaming that we know of We don’t have money to do the study We don’t have money to fix the problems the study will reveal If this goes public the voters will wonder why the Board let the place “fall apart” (or why have you left the place fall apart?)

Service Description Advantages Disadvantages Approx. Margin of Error Cost (per square foot) Facility Condition Assessment:   Level 1 Deterioration Curve Model Evaluates a statistically-valid sample of the portfolio and forecasts broader conditions Inexpensive Deterioration curves represent life cycle costs modified with field data and projected as future failures Only suitable for long term capital budgeting Tends to be relatively accurate when employed on a homogeneous sample or when evaluating subsets of space within a specific building. Less accurate when utilized on non-homogenous samples.  $0.03 to $0.08 Level 2 Economic Remaining Life Modeled system-level assessment based on field observation and standard system life cycles Cost effective approach for capital budgeting Lack sufficient definition for an actionable work order plan without more detailed assessment at a later date Represents the condition of the facility or remaining life as opposed to the deferred maintenance needs as remaining life identifies component renewal not deferred maintenance Neither of these inspection processes is inherently more or less accurate when utilized at the same inspection level as both rely on subjective judgment in the development of the base data set.  $0.05 to $0.15 Level 3 Quantitative Deficiencies Room-by-room, system and component level field observation yielding a detailed catalog of deferred maintenance backlog Suitable for defining prioritized maintenance work orders and capital projects Data is reported in terms of dollars to correct at the identified level of inspection Most labor intensive approach Involves a physical investigation at the selected level of assessment to ascertain specific deficiencies present  $0.10 to $0.25

Many Options are Available Suitability Sustainability Equipment inventory ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers) analysis-other options for this as well

Summing it All Up As Ferris Buehler said “If you can afford it, I would highly recommend it”. Afford it applies to both the study and the projected fixes. Anticipate Board objections Carefully craft your FCA RFQ scope of work When you contract, know exactly what you are getting Call me if I can help

Thank You!!! Questions?