Streamlined Facilities Condition Assessments and Parametric Modeling for Deferred Maintenance Cost Estimates Authors: Dan Geldermann, P.E., and Don Sapp, Plexus Scientific Corporation [email protected] Oct. 2006 Government/Industry Forum October 31, 2006 Sponsored by the Federal Facilities Council www.nationalacademies.org/ffc For federal real property managers of large dispersed portfolios, determining facilities conditions and deferred maintenance (DM)1 requirements using traditional methods is a significant challenge and major expense. The approach of estimating DM by inspecting facilities and creating detailed job plans with estimated costs for observed problems has remained relatively unchanged for decades. This article outlines a more efficient method of performing condition assessments and estimating deferred maintenance needs over traditional methods. Current Problems Recurring assessments are a prudent way to benchmark and stay abreast of facility conditions, and they are a building block for developing a needs-based maintenance program. Unfortunately, there are problems with traditional condition assessments: • They are expensive and time consuming with inspection costs ranging from $0.08 per square foot to a high end of $1.50 per square foot depending on the level of detail and degree of sophistication. • In an effort to reduce assessment costs, many organizations have increased the time between conducting facility inspections up to as much as five years. Stretching the inspection intervals has mismatched the timelines for comparing facilities and installations within a large portfolio. • From a field perspective, the unknown use of data by headquarters and a lack of any visible funding impact from submissions have fostered a low of priority on updating existing data. • A significant downside to developing detailed estimates for all deficiencies is the limited shelf life of these job plans. After several months most estimates require a review to incorporate changes that may have occurred. Also demoralizing to estimators is the number of completed job plans that are never funded. • Assessments are not consistently performed from installation to installation. They may be based on differing methods, intervals and qualifications of personnel performing the assessment. All of this leaves the headquarters manager and auditors with questions on the validity and timeliness of using available condition data for comparisons between installations. • To further call into question the usefulness of DM for allocating resources, field inputs have become suspect at headquarters as resource requests for DM seem to ebb and flow with funding climates. When available funding is perceived, DM numbers quickly rise at installations anxious to get their share. Conversely, installations suddenly become well if potential closures are rumored. This has led to a credibility gap of reported results and an uneven playing field between field activities vying for the same resources. 1 “Deferred Maintenance is maintenance that was not performed when it should have been or was scheduled to be and which, therefore, is put off or delayed for a future period.” Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (1996) NASA wind tunnel rapid equipment assessmentStreamlined Facilities Condition Assessments and Parametric Modeling for Deferred Maintenance Cost Estimates 2 A New Approach Large agencies should consider another method for accomplishing condition assessments that will return credibility to assessments and reduce costs to accomplish them. In a successful new strategic approach to address condition assessment problems, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) facilities organization, which is responsible for 44 million square feet (SF) of space contained in 5,300 facilities with a current replacement value of over $25 billion, worked with Plexus Scientific Corporation to develop a rapid, low-cost, consistent facilities condition system that results in a set of useful metrics including a DM estimate, levels the playing field by eliminating any biased installation reporting, and reduces the number of detailed cost estimates that are prepared and never used. This assessment method has been developed and refined over several years of field work and independent reviews, and is now used to assess the condition of NASA facilities worldwide. This approach has been compared against other more detailed methods by the Army’s Civil Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL), and reviewed by Whitestone Research for economic viability. CERL confirmed that DM results on test groups were within 10% of other more expensive assessment methods and Whitestone Research provided positive feedback. “The primary purpose of the NASA Deferred Maintenance Model is to provide a general measure the condition of individual facilities, and an estimate of the current work needs for a large inventory of facilities based on their condition. Based on this comparison study, the NASA model performs these functions accurately and efficiently. Because of the high-level assessment focus, it is quick and inexpensive to implement up front. It is an ideal tool for agency planners to create defensible budgets and allocate resources to the installations level. If budget creation is the primary objective of an asset management plan, then the NASA DM model satisfies this requirement completely.” Engineer Research and Development Center Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL) (February 2004) “The DM methodology is a promising approach for estimating NASA deferred maintenance requirements. Its data collection process and cost estimation procedure both represent significant improvements over established procedures such as the U.S. Army ISR [Installation Status Report]. The consistency of its ratings in repeated trials is impressive and well documented. The cost estimation procedure is conceptually sound.” Whitestone Research (July 2002) The NASA Method provides an appraisal of the general condition of all facilities and an estimate of deferred maintenance (DM) (or recapitalization) costs using a parametric estimating method that has cost NASA $0.02 per SF for each inspection cycle. This is four times less expensive than the next recognized assessment method in widespread use. The NASA method was designed to provide consistent, auditable deferred maintenance
View Full Document
Unlocking...