Getting the Most out of Government Enterprise Assets and Facilities

Getting the Most Out of Government Enterprise Assets and Facilities2:10 p.m. -2:50 p.m.

Speakers include:• Tim Harvey, Chief, Park Facility Management Division, National Park Service• Tom Arcuri, IBM Software Group, Maximo & Tririga Business Solutions Manage • Kay Murphy, IBM Associate Partner, Public Sector Asset Management, Global Business Services

Getting the Most out of Government Enterprise Assets and Facilities

Stewardship of Assets, Facing Reality

Tim HarveyChief, Park Facility Management Division

National Park Service

Tom ArcurriIBM Software Group

Maximo and Tririga Business Solutions Manager

Kay Murphy IBM Associate Partner

Public Sector Asset ManagementGlobal Business Services

To achieve excellence in EAM process: Focus on lifecycle and reliability

Assess your strengths and opportunities and develop a roadmap

• Mostly reactive work, no planning

• Highly centralized workforce

• Little or no systems in place

• Focus is on cost, primarily supply chain

• Little cross team collaboration

• Little performance measures in place

• Deferred maintenance

• Partially centralized

• System in place, scheduling

• Some storeroom controls, lack measurements

• Some teamwork in place

• PM program, some planning

• Priorities applied to deferred work

• Space utilization metrics in place

• Long term planning in place

• Development of collaborative, multi-skilled staff

• EAM linked to financials, SC, PLM

• Strategic sourcing

• Metrics in place, reliability and cost

• Integration with sensors/actuators

• Asset portfolio strategy

• Application of analytics

• Open standards based integration

• SLAs, vendor performance indicators

• Business focus, high collaboration

• Benchmarking, strong detail on reliability / cost

EAM iscost focused

EAM isan investment

Navigating your roadmap

• EAM business value assessment

• Implementation planning, design, configuration and installation

• Training and change management

• Basic KPI and reporting development

• Deployment assistance

• O&M support services

• Cost takeout advisory services

• Escalation and workflow development

• Advanced KPI and reporting development

• Mobile implementation

• Current system use analysis

• Assistance establishing a PM program

• Business process improvement

• Side-by-side staff development

• EAM Integration with ERP, PLM and other existing systems

• Inventory optimization

• Integration with sensors/actuators

• Implementation of functional add-ons for advanced capability

• Assist with developing an asset portfolio strategy

• Application of analytics for smarter solutions

• Smarter spending

• Implementation of GIS, TMS and other related solutions

EAM iscost focused

EAM isan investment

For Additional Information

Visit the Agile Summit Solution Center for demonstrations of these capabilities.

Ask an IBM Ambassador for additional information (case study, white paper, solution brief, etc.) related to the content shared during this session.

For a follow up discussion, complete the IBM Response Card on the table in front of you.

Thank You !

Nati

onal Pa

rk S

erv

ice

Park

Faci

lity

Managem

ent

Div

isio

n

E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A

National Park ServiceGetting the Most out of Government Enterprise Assets and Facilities

Tim HarveyChief, Park Facility Management Division

N A T I O N A L P A R K S E R V I C E P A R K F A C I L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T D I V I S I O N

9E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A


10

"to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life

therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such

means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

1916 Organic Act





















The NPS manages a very large, diverse and complex asset portfolio

Source of Data: Facility Management Software System (FMSS), FY2011 Year End (Oct 1, 2011)• Location Status = EXCESS, INACTIVE, OPER/OBSO,

OPERATING; • Location Occupant = ALL; • Location Asset Code ≠ 0000 (Site/Area), 8999 (Fleet), and 9999

(No Asset Code Available)

* Paved and Unpaved Roads’ counts, DM, and CRV includes Parking Areas, Bridges, and Tunnels

NPS inventory (FY2011)

Deferred Maintenance (DM): $ backlog of regular recurring maintenance, component renewal needs, or other repair/rehabilitation work that has gone unaddressed for over a year.

Current Replacement Value (CRV): $ replacement value of an asset calculated using current industry standards and costs

Facility Condition Index (FCI): Metric between 0 (best) and 1 (worst) that indicates facility condition calculated by dividing DM by CRV

Asset Type Count Quantity UnitDeferred Maintenance

Current Replacement Value

Facility Condition Index

Buildings 22,849 42,726,740 SF $2,133 M $22,254 M 0.096Housing 5,112 8,553,160 SF $224 M $2,575 M 0.087Campgrounds 1,375 14,530 AC $83 M $1,243 M 0.066Trails 6,855 92,761,900 LF $650 M $6,364 M 0.102Waste Water Systems 1,962 18,662,140 GPD $259 M $2,084 M 0.124Water Systems 1,586 35,261,230 GPD $320 M $4,652 M 0.069Roads - - - $5,711 M $30,241 M 0.189

Paved Roads* 10,836 5,500 MI $5,363 M $25,100 M 0.214Unpaved Roads* 6,240 4,500 MI $348 M $5,141 M 0.079

All Other 14,780 - - $2,019 M $121,672 M 0.017Subtotal 71,595 - - $11,399 M $191,087 M 0.060


21

At the end of FY11, deferred maintenance on all NPS assets had grown to $11.4 billion


For source of data see notes on slide 21

Na-tional Capital Region

Midwest Region

Intermountain Re-gion

Southeast Region

Alaska Region

Pacific West Re-

gion

Northeast Re-gion

Regional distribution of $11.4 billion in DM


22

Source of data: Total estimated cost ($) from open work orders in FMSS categorized by shown work types

For source of DM see slide 21

Source of Capital Improvement and Other Needs: FMSS Work Order Report, FY2010 Year End• Work Orders Status ≠CAN, COMP, CLOSED• Location Status = EXCESS, INACTIVE, OPER/OBSO, OPERATING, NOTAPPLICABLE, NOT READY, PLANNED• Location Occupant = ALL• Location Asset Code ≠ 0000 (Site/Area), 8999 (Fleet), and 9999 (No Asset Code Available)

* Accessibility need represents only what is currently assessed and entered into work orders. The actual accessibility need is at estimated to be at least $350M Servicewide

Total backlog of programmatic facility needs stands at $16 billion


Distribution of Total Need by Program/Work Type: $16B

Deferred Maintenance$11.4B, 72%

Capital Imp $4.0B, 24%

Other: $630M, 4%

Energy (EP): $174M, 1.1%

Code Compliance (LMCO): $141M, <1%

Life Safety (LMLS): $106M, <1%

Accessibility (LMAC): $88M, <1%

Structural Fire (LMFS): $51M, <1%

Environmental (Lead/Asbestos): $68M, <1%


23

Forecast

'08

'09

'10

'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

'16

'17

'18

'19

'20

'21

$0

$5,000,000,000

$10,000,000,000

$15,000,000,000

$9,9

00,

000,

000

.00

$10,

190

,319

,42

9.00

$10,

985

,672

,16

7.00

$11,

398

,913

,93

1.24

$11,

778

,280

,11

7.53

$12,

088

,469

,83

6.43

$12,

415

,308

,37

2.48

$12,

759

,416

,19

9.64

$13,

121

,433

,98

4.88

$13,

502

,023

,20

0.08

$13,

901

,866

,75

1.64

$14,

321

,669

,62

8.31

$14,

762

,159

,56

7.81

$15,

224

,087

,74

2.69

Def

erre

d M

aint

enan

ce ($

Bil

-lio

n)

DM data collected from the past four years indicates that the backlog will exceed$15 billion in 10 years

DM increase has averaged 5% annually over the past four years

At the current rate of investment of $350 million/year, deterioration will continue to accumulate on all facilities


OMB Eight Ind. Std. Reports for FY year end

5% average increase per

year

Forecasted DM from Scenario Tool with a baseline of FY11, 2.4% inflation, and annual facility deterioration rate of 0.19% of CRV

Representing FMSS location records with Occupant = All, Status = Excess, Inactive, Oper/Obso, Operating, Excluding 0000, 8999, 9999 assets


24

Projected Backlog and FCI The following chart shows what happens to the DM with funding staying

constant at the FY12 level of $323 million over the next 10 years. On average DM will increase by $411 million per year. This figure

excludes DM that would be added by the inclusion of new park units.


'11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 '21$0

$5,000,000,000

$10,000,000,000

$15,000,000,000

$20,000,000,000

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070$1

1398

913

931.

243

B$1

1722

323

332.

841

B$1

2102

342

611.

291

B$1

2460

745

156.

868

B$1

2837

132

075.

288

B$1

3232

160

176.

581

B$1

3646

507

438.

662

B$1

4080

873

645.

060

B$1

4535

981

041.

081

B$1

5012

575

008.

892

B$1

5511

424

762.

077

B

DM Usual FCI Usual

Year

Def

erre

d M

ain

-te

nanc

e

FCI

The projections are made using the Scenario Tool incorporating standard deterioration rates, inflation, and a baseline DM of $11.399 billion in FY11.


25

Funding Required to Keep DM at a Steady State

The Park Facility Management Division estimates that in order to keep DM at a steady state for a period of ten years from FY13 onwards, $700 million is required1.


Required Funding to Maintain Steady State DM of $11.399 billion

($, millions)

FY13-22

Required Funding for

DM

Difference From FY13 Proposed

Repair and Rehab – Facility Maintenance

203.9 +148.3

Line Item Construction Total2 132.4 +105.7

Recreation Fee – Facility Maintenance 228.4 +158.4

Federal Lands Highway Program 130.0 +/-0

Housing Improvement 5.2 4.4

Total 700.0 416.91 Funding Required: Current DM information, inflation, standard deterioration rates for each asset type, are used to model the appropriate funding required to maintain the backlog at a steady state. The funding increases are divided proportionally amongst the R/R, LIC, Rec Fees, and Housing Improvement programs.

2 LIC program may require additional funding for Planning (17% of any additional program over $70M total) and the Denver Service Center (currently fully funded for an LIC program of up to $150M, 5% of program cost otherwise)


26

In the NPS FY 15 Capital Investment Strategy, project work orders are evaluated in each of four elements

Element Strategic Goal Activities Captured

FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

• build only what can be maintained• right-size the portfolio• reduce liabilities• eliminate non-essential development in

parks in order to emphasize the parks natural and cultural significance

• disposition of non-essential facilities • reduction of O&M requirements and

liabilities• energy reduction• fiscal stewardship• sharpened focus core resources

VISITOR USE• invest in facilities that primarily serve

visitors, are primary points of recreation, and encourage all users to spend more time outdoors

• investment in facilities that directly enable outdoor recreation

• investment in facilities that are primary touch points for visitors to the park

RESOURCE PROTECTION

• preserve and protect valuable and unique natural and cultural resources

• preservation and repair of historic and LCS assets, cultural landscapes, and natural resources

• environmental and cultural restoration

HEALTH AND SAFETY

• correct facility or site-related deficiencies and hazards that may cause injury or harm to the public, staff, or the environment

• correction of existing and identified unsafe and hazardous conditions at NPS facilities


27

The strategy leverages information that generated from investments in facility condition assessments over the last several years

AssetWBS/Critical System Critical, Non Critical

LocationOptimizer Band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Asset Code 1100, 2100, 3100, etc.Type Building Type, Road & Trail ClassAPI 0 – 100API Operations High, Medium, Low, NoneAPI Resource High, Medium, Low, NoneAPI Visitor High, Medium, Low, NoneFCI 0 – 1.0Utilization Over, Utilized, Under, NotLocation Status Oper, Oper/Obso, Inactive, etc.Occupant NPS, Concessions, etc.Primary Use Admin, Public

Work OrderWork Type/SubType FM-DM, CI-NC, etc.Work Order Priority Critical, Serious, MinorEstimated Cost $WBS/Critical System Yes/NoResource RAC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Health and Safety RAC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Based solely on Facility Management Software System (FMSS) information, project scope can be examined and scored, providing:• Repeatability• Accountability•

• Controllability• Updatability


28

Impacts of the FY15 Capital Investment Strategy - The Focus

Under Band 1 and 2, there are 23,102 location records with $2.3 billion* in CSDM as seen in the table below:


Optimizer Band

Location Count

Deferred Maintenance

Critical Systems

DM*

Current Replacement

Value

1 10,301 $3,794 M $1,341 M $92,783 M

2 12,801 $2,481 M $954 M $21,870 M

3 21,407 $1,883 M $647 M $25,864 M

4 14,582 $1,972 M $619 M $32,680 M

5 12,504 $1,269 M $503 M $17,891 M

Total 71,595 $11,399 M $4,063 M $191,087M

* Paved roads is excluded from the Critical Systems DM report


29

Overall , the NPS Capital Investment Strategy is a comprehensive approach for ranking and prioritizing projects

The proposed Capital Investment Strategy:– Continues focus on high priority facilities, and critical

components– Accounts for the mission benefits of projects– Emphasizes a life-cycle management approach to project

selectionIdentifying the importance of location and work within

a portfolio

1. Type of Work 2. Asset Priority3. Facility Condition 4. Critical Systems5. Work Priority

Requirement

Calculating benefits in support of the mission

1. Health and Safety2. Natural Resource Protection3. Cultural Resource Protection4. Visitor Experience5. Utilization & Capacity

Improvement

Benefit

Understanding financial risks and return of the

investment

1. Maintenance Sustainment2. Operational Improvement3. Energy Savings4. Portfolio Reduction5. Total Costs of Facility

Ownership

Investment


30

The Good News – NPS’s critical assets (Band 1 and 2 locations) will be vastly improved in 10 years The FY15 Capital Investment Strategy proposes to focus $320 million on CSDM on only Band 1 and 2 locations. As seen in the scenario below, beginning in FY15, the CSDM on the high priority locations will reduce from $2.3 billion to $1.1 billion and FCI will be reduced from 0.024 to 0.014 by FY22.


'11

'12

'13

'14

'15

'16

'17

'18

'19

'20

'21

'22

$0

$500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

$2,000,000,000

$2,500,000,000

$3,000,000,000

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

$2,4

44,1

87,

548.

2$2

,545

,95

0,04

9.6

$2,6

52,8

36,

066.

6$2

,765

,03

2,91

2.5

$2,6

31,3

49,

251.

2$2

,497

,33

6,11

5.1

$2,3

63,0

54,

691.

3$2

,228

,56

9,29

3.6

$2,0

93,9

47,

477.

3$1

,959

,26

0,15

7.9

$1,8

24,5

81,

733.

5$1

,689

,99

0,21

0.8

DM Strategic FCI Strategic

YearDef

erre

d M

aint

enan

ce

FCI

FY'11 FY'22

FCI 0.024 0.009

CSDM

$2,295 M $1,086 M


31

The Not-So-Good News – The remainder of the portfolio will accumulate CSDM at a faster rate

Band 3, 4, and 5 locations have $1.8 billion in CSDM. The net effect of shifting all investment dollars to Band 1 and 2 locations is that there will be no project funding available to address DM needs for Bands 3, 4, and 5.

Over the next 10 year period (FY13 to FY22), CSDM on Bands 3, 4, and 5 will increase from $1.8 billion to $3.2 billion and FCI will increase from 0.026 to 0.036.


'11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 '21 '22$0

$500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

$2,000,000,000

$2,500,000,000

$3,000,000,000

$3,500,000,000

0.0000.0050.0100.0150.0200.0250.0300.0350.040

$1,7

68,8

00,

381.

5$1

,838

,01

0,13

5.9

$1,9

10,7

14,

855.

9$1

,987

,04

2,43

5.0

$2,1

16,7

80,

160.

3$2

,251

,60

0,75

9.9

$2,3

91,6

73,

483.

0$2

,537

,17

2,77

4.7

$2,6

88,2

78,

428.

5$2

,845

,17

5,74

2.1

$3,0

08,0

55,

678.

5$3

,177

,11

5,03

0.5

DM Strategic FCI Strategic

YearDef

erre

d M

aint

enan

ce

FCI

FY'11 FY'22

FCI 0.026 0.036

CSDM

$1,769 M $3,177 M



Questions

Documents

Getting the Most out of Government Enterprise Assets and Facilities