Condition Audits for Grounds Assets TEFMA Grounds Workshop Brisbane, May 2007 Steve Lake, Business...

Condition Audits forGrounds Assets

TEFMA Grounds WorkshopBrisbane, May 2007

Steve Lake, Business Improvement ManagerRichard Phillips, Asset Protection Officer

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

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

Internal DriversAUQA Audit Report 2005:

“…recommends that UoM develop a plan for addressing the deferred maintenance problems ……...”

The Corporate Strategy:• “…maintain the condition of the University’s 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…”

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.

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

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

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.

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

Funding 2007 - 2011

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Years

$ M

illio

ns

- M

ain

ten

an

ce

Sp

en

d

Backlog Maintenance

General Maintenance

$13.2M (+3% per year)

Funding for Maintenance in 2007

Safety and Emergency

9%Upgrade and Replacement

5%

Refurbishment15%

Statutory and Compliance

28%

Backlog23%

Routine and Discretionary

20%

Prioritisation Model

Condition and Appearance

Program of Works for 2007 – 2011 ($61 million)

Risk and Importance

Functionality

Total Estimated Backlog ($200+ Million)

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.

Functionality Rating

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.)

Practical Assessment of strategic initiatives

Audit Progress - Buildings

Key Building Elements

Estimated Backlog

Maintenance Total

Structure 2,500,000$ Walls, W indows & Doors 4,257,100$ Roofing 3,050,200$ Interiors 5,689,100$ Lifts 14,046,700$ Plumbing 2,278,000$ HVAC 9,215,500$ BAS 4,178,200$ Fire Protection 2,246,000$ Electrical 960,500$ Equipment & Furnishings 195,000$ Special Construction & Demolit ion 3,564,000$

Tota l: 52,180,300$

Audit Progress - Buildings

Building NameBuilding Number

Estimated Backlog

Maintenance Tota l

Backlog Maintenance

Interior Appearance

Backlog Maintenance Structure &

Services

Overall Facility

ConditionW ilson Hall 151 2,155,335$ 199,900$ 1,955,435$ FairNatural Philosophy (Botany) 143 2,452,425$ 31,200$ 2,421,225$ FairBaldwin Spencer 113 2,611,660$ 84,000$ 2,527,660$ GoodChemistry East 154 1,507,653$ 549,300$ 958,353$ GoodJohn Medley (East & W est) 191 2,512,900$ 321,900$ 2,191,000$ GoodElisabeth Murdoch (Old Pathology) 134 1,421,030$ 27,700$ 1,393,330$ GoodOld Commerce 132 621,465$ 18,500$ 602,965$ GoodOld Geology 155 512,700$ 60,200$ 452,500$ GoodOld Geology South 156 351,800$ 14,800$ 337,000$ GoodUnion House 130 3,040,108$ 65,200$ 2,974,908$ GoodBabel Building 139 560,675$ 20,650$ 540,025$ GoodMcCoy Building 200 977,825$ 156,500$ 821,325$ GoodBaillieu Library 177 2,661,500$ 444,250$ 2,217,250$ GoodRedmond Barry 115 1,895,900$ 121,400$ 1,774,500$ GoodRichard Berry House 157 65,100$ 34,800$ 30,300$ GoodRaymond Priestley 152 921,520$ 13,000$ 908,520$ GoodOld Physics 128 318,700$ 23,700$ 295,000$ GoodRichard Berry 160 1,157,900$ 141,400$ 1,016,500$ GoodSports Centre 103 1,000,000$ 3,000$ 997,000$ Very GoodOld Arts 149 722,250$ 251,600$ 470,650$ Very GoodPhysics (New) 192 1,434,450$ 192,400$ 1,242,050$ Very GoodChemistry 153 1,395,200$ 702,300$ 692,900$ Very GoodOld Quad (Old Law) 150 633,450$ 183,300$ 450,150$ Very GoodArchitecture 133 552,800$ 92,300$ 460,500$ Very GoodSouth Car Park 195 11,800$ 9,800$ 2,000$ Very Good

Totals 31,496,146$ 3,763,100$ 27,733,046$

Colour Key: Very Good Good Fair Poor Demolish

Audit Progress - Grounds

Zone NameZone

Number Services Surfaces HorticultureFixtures & Structures Total

Tin A lley to Masson Rd. (NE Parkville) 1 29,000$ 29,250$ 8,455$ 45,800$ 112,505$

Masson Rd. to Monash Rd. (EC Parkville) 2 27,700$ 60,650$ 9,140$ 73,450$ 170,940$

Monash Rd. to Grattan St. (SE Parkville) 3 14,500$ 10,450$ 20,310$ 50,950$ 96,210$

Union Law n/Tin A lley/R.Barry (NC Parkville) 4 170,450$ 289,210$ 35,365$ 82,900$ 577,925$

Engineering Precinct (SC Parkville) 5 18,900$ 21,800$ 15,130$ 42,400$ 98,230$

Totals: $260,550 $411,360 $88,400 $295,500 $1,055,810

2007 Works Program

Category Budget % CommentsW ilson Hall 850,000$ 17% Full building refurbishment split 2007 and 2008.Baillieu Library 850,000$ 17% Full building refurbishment split 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Lift Strategy 1,800,000$ 36%Refurbishments to Architecture, Mech. Eng., Civil Eng. and Chemistry.

Building Services 500,000$ 10% Ten $50k projects based on highest priority.Grounds 1,000,000$ 20% Various Upgrade Projects (see below).

Total: 5,000,000$ 100%

Element Project 2007Fixtures Signage $ 250,000 Furniture Seats, Benches and Tables $ 100,000 Surfaces Paving $ 250,000 Services External Lighting $ 50,000 Horticulture Landscape Works $ 250,000 Furniture Bicycle Parking $ 50,000 Fixtures Waste Bins $ 50,000

Tota ls: $ 1,000,000

Grounds

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.

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

Grounds: In the Beginning….

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

Issue:No existing audit classifications with a GROUNDS / LANDSCAPE Focus.

My Role:Grounds Planning Officer with non-audit responsibilities.

What are the Major Element Groups?

A. Services

B. Surfaces

C. Horticulture

D. Fixtures & Structures

E. Sports Precincts

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….

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….

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

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…

Grounds Zones

Grounds Sub-Areas

Condition Rating Table

Risk Rating Table

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)

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

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.

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.