Condition Audits for Grounds Assets

1
Condition Audits forGrounds Assets

• TEFMA Grounds Workshop
• Brisbane, May 2007
• Steve Lake, Business Improvement Manager
• Richard Phillips, Asset Protection Officer

2
Condition Audits for Grounds Assets

• If the surroundings of a university were
  beautiful, then the spirit of a university would
  be better than if the surroundings were merely
  utilitarian.
• Sir John Latham, 2 September 1935

3
External Drivers

• NCRB, 1995
• Acknowledged underspend on building maintenance
  across the tertiary education sector
• Desirable level of maintenance 1-1.5 ARV
• Average University spend 0.8 ARV
• Actual spend at UoM in 2005 0.8 ARV
• Group of 8, 2005
• TEFMA Benchmark Comparisons
• Based on 5 year average (2000 2004)

Institution ANU Monash Adelaide UoM Sydney UNSW UQ UWA
ARV 0.43 1.06 0.99 0.59 0.61 0.96 0.88 0.70
4
Internal Drivers

• AUQA Audit Report 2005
• recommends that UoM develop a plan for
  addressing the deferred maintenance problems
  ...
• The Corporate Strategy
• maintain the condition of the Universitys
  property portfolio in line with the Melbourne
  Experience.
• progressively renew physical infrastructure to
  support learning.
• an important aspect of the Melbourne Experience
  is the provision of a safe, attractive campus
  with outstanding educational, social, cultural
  and recreational amenities.
• Operational Review 2005
• a long term plan to reduce the maintenance
  backlog

5
Backlog Maintenance Strategy

• Definition
• Maintenance that is necessary to prevent the
  deterioration of the asset or its function but
  which has not been carried out. (TEFMA)
• Extent
• In 2005, the extent of the backlog was estimated
  at 203M.
• Exclusions
• faculty equipment and room soft furnishings
• buildings less than 5 years of age
• buildings due to be demolished in the next 10
  years
• normal items of routine maintenance and
• service upgrades.

6
The TEFMA Model

• AAPPA Guidelines for Strategic Asset Management
  (2000)
• Uniformat II Classification for Building Elements
• Rating Tables for
• Condition
• Risk
• Importance
• Functionality
• Facility Condition Index and Overall Rating
  System
• No classification system for Grounds

7
Project Plan

• Stage 1 March May 2006
• Researched the TEFMA Community and Commercial
  models
• Undertook a Pilot Study
• Stage 2 May March 2007
• Train Internal Assessment Team
• Undertake Assessment of Parkville Campus
• Stage 3 January December 2007
• Produce a prioritised Backlog Maintenance Program
• Conduct Stakeholder Consultation
• Develop Long Term Program

8
Data Management

• Audit spreadsheets (Microsoft Excel) offer
  advantages when considering individual buildings
  / grounds zones but have limitations for campus
  wide data analysis.
• Considered BEIMS, Archibus and other proprietary
  tools.
• Selected BEIMS as the preferred tool because
• SQL Server database offers required functionality
  for data storage, analysis and reporting in the
  long term
• we already use BEIMS for work order management
• Mercury Computer Systems were prepared to work
  with us in developing a TEFMA-based Condition
  Audit module and data upload tools for our Audit
  spreadsheets and
• control, custodianship, flexibility and value for
  money.

9
Early Wins!

• 61M Funding approved in May 2006
• commencing 2007
• rising from 5M to 20M in 2011
• Support from Mercury Computer Systems to develop
  BEIMS Condition Audit module
• We could now focus on conducting a full audit of
  the Parkville campus

10
Funding 2007 - 2011
11
Funding for Maintenance in 2007
12
Prioritisation Model
Total Estimated Backlog (200 Million)
Condition and Appearance
Risk and Importance
Functionality
Program of Works for 2007 2011 (61 million)
13
Consultation

• Developed a 20 question Facility Condition Survey
  form.
• Questions have been aligned to individual
  building and grounds elements to facilitate
  comparison.
• 50 key stakeholders identified across all
  faculties to coordinate surveys within their own
  buildings.
• Currently establishing correlation between
  responses and condition audit.
• Developed 2 page Summary Plans for each Building
  / Grounds Zone to facilitate effective
  communication with individual faculties.

14
Functionality Rating
Practical Assessment of strategic initiatives
Determination of Timing and Funding

• Consideration given to planned refurbishments,
  demolitions, etc. reality check so that the
  outcome has maximum effect.
• Consideration given to changes in regulations
  and other strategic initiatives (i.e. energy and
  water conservation).
• Consideration of appropriate source of funding
  (i.e. Backlog Maintenance, Compliance,
  Discretionary, etc.)

15
Audit Progress - Buildings
16
Audit Progress - Buildings
17
Audit Progress - Grounds
18
2007 Works Program
Grounds
19
Analysis and Reporting

• Using analysis and reporting functions within new
  BEIMS Building Condition Assessment (BCA)
  module.
• Reports available (for Buildings)
• by element and priority / condition within a
  specific building
• by element and priority / condition across all
  buildings
• by overall building condition or appearance
• and by various combinations and selections
• A Grounds Condition Assessment module has not
  been developed as yet.

20
Achievements Thus Far

• Established Assessment Team (internal staff
  external contractors)
• Engaged Consultants for Specialist Assessment
• Assessed 70 Buildings and 10 Grounds Zones
• Captured Routine Maintenance works
• Developed Progress Reporting Tools
• Developed new BEIMS Building Condition
  Assessment module
• Developed a Consultation Framework
• Committed 2 million to date of 2007 Works
  Program

21
Grounds In the Beginning.
My Role Grounds Planning Officer with non-audit
responsibilities.
Issue No existing audit classifications with a
GROUNDS / LANDSCAPE Focus.

• Challenges
• Modification of the building classification
  system to suit our Grounds assets.
• Undertaking Grounds Audits
• Existing commitments and responsibilities

22
What are the Major Element Groups?

1. Services
2. Surfaces
3. Horticulture
4. Fixtures Structures
5. Sports Precincts

23
Element Groups

• A. Services
• A10 Below Ground Services
• A1010 Water Reticulation
• A1020 Stormwater / Drainage
• Etc..
• A20 Above Ground Services
• A2010 Lighting Power
• A2020 Security Cameras
• A2030 Fire Hydrants Boxes
• Etc.

24
Element Groups

• B. Surfaces
• B10 Road Surfaces
• B1010 Bitumen Road Surfaces
• B1020 Unsealed Road Surfaces
• Etc.
• B20 Kerb Channel
• B2010 Material
• B2020 Crossovers
• B30 Pedestrian Walkways
• B3010 Paved Surfaces
• B3020 Gravel Surfaces
• Etc.

25
Element Groups

• C. Horticulture
• C10 Grassed Areas
• C20 Garden Beds
• C30 Arboriculture
• C40 Water Features
• C50 Roof Gardens
• C60 Planters, Containers Boxes
• C70 Wall Climbers Creepers
• C80 Internal Courtyards
• C90 Mulches
• C100 Plant Labels
• C110 Hedges

26
Element Groups

• D. Fixtures Structures
• D10 Furniture
• D20 Enclosures
• D30 Ornamental Features
• D40 Waste
• D50 Traffic Control
• D60 Structures
• E. Sports Precincts
• E10 Tracks
• E20 Courts
• Etc

27
Grounds Zones
28
Grounds Sub-Areas
29
Condition Rating Table
30
Risk Rating Table
31
Works Costing

• Using agreed values, in partnership with
  contractors, as a tool is prioritising works
• Area analysis / Works costings
• Utilising GIS/CAD plans for accuracy
• per m
• Surfaces
• Landscape
• per Zone (larger area)

32
Challenges

• Resource Management
• Skill development
• Audit consistency and continuity for audit staff
• Time Management
• Data entry and management
• Developing, estimating and managing works
  schedules
• My role has now changed to Asset Protection
  Officer
• Underground Services Auditing!
• Integrating the Identified Works into an Overall
  Planning Regime

33
Summary

• The Condition Audit process sets out to
• identify projects
• estimate costs
• identify risks
• provide a sense of priority
• Our Prioritisation Model is based on
• condition
• appearance
• risk
• planned refurbishment works
• and consultation with the Faculties.
• The Asset Protection Program is an ongoing
  process that will need to be funded over many
  years to address the 200M backlog.

34
Future Directions

• Go Live with the BEIMS Building Condition
  Assessment module
• Continue to develop the science behind our
  approach to Grounds classification and
  prioritisation
• Develop a Grounds Condition Assessment module
  for BEIMS in collaboration with Mercury Computer
  Systems and with input from the broader TEFMA
  community.