SY1819 Baltimore City Public Schools

Comprehensive

Maintenance Plan

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 2

Mission Statement and Goals ..................................................................................................................... 3

Maintenance and Operations Overview ................................................................................................... 5

Recent History & Maintenance of Public School Facilities in Baltimore City ...................................... 7

21st Century School Buildings Plan ........................................................................................................... 8

Current Accomplishments ....................................................................................................................... 10

Challenges ......................................................................................................................................... 12

Funding ......................................................................................................................................... 14

General Operating Budget ...................................................................................................................... 14

Capital Budget ........................................................................................................................................ 16

Unfunded Mandates .................................................................................................................................. 19

Facility Maintenance & Operations Staffing .......................................................................................... 19

Facility Inspections and Full-Building Audits ........................................................................................ 21

Comprehensive Educational Facilities Master Plan .............................................................................. 22

Capital Improvement Plan ....................................................................................................................... 22

CIP Prioritization Process/Project Review ............................................................................................. 23

Comprehensive Maintenance Plan .......................................................................................................... 25

Definitions ......................................................................................................................................... 28

APPENDIX A 2018-2019 Organizational Chart .................................................................................. 31

APPENDIX B Budget and Staffing Scenarios Based on 2014 CMP .................................................. 35

APPENDIX C Mapped Regional Assignments .................................................................................... 40

APPENDIX D Metrics ............................................................................................................................ 41

APPENDIX E Scheduled Maintenance ................................................................................................ 50

APPENDIX F Unscheduled Maintenance ............................................................................................ 54

APPENDIX G Deferred Maintenance .................................................................................................. 55

APPENDIX H Action Plans ................................................................................................................... 56

APPENDIX I Energy ............................................................................................................................ 56

2

Executive Summary

The State of Maryland’s Interagency Committee on School Construction (IAC) and the Public

School Construction Program (PSCP) require that each Local Education Agency (LEA) establish

and annually update a Comprehensive Maintenance Plan (CMP). The comprehensive plan must

describe the Baltimore City Schools' Board of School Commissioner’s (School Board) strategy for

maintaining its public school facilities, and the plan must also be compatible with the School

Board’s Comprehensive Educational Facilities Master Plan (CEFMP) and Capital Improvement

Plan (CIP). The PSCP analyzes each LEA’s plan when capital project funding decisions are

undertaken.

Additionally, per the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) resulting from the passage of House

Bill (HB) 860 by the State of Maryland in fiscal year (FY) 2013 for the Construction and

Revitalization of Baltimore City Public Schools, City Schools must provide a plan for maintaining

school buildings and demonstrate progress toward achievement to be measured through a set of 13

Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) metrics approved by the IAC.

The CMP details City Schools’ organizational structure, plans, and activities established to

maintain State and Local Government investment in public school facilities. Representing the

School Board, the department of Facilities, Maintenance and Operations (FM&O) oversees these

plans and programs, while the Facility Planning department administers the CEFMP, which

includes the CIP.

The plan demonstrates how City Schools’ FM&O department:

1) Meets the School Board’s expectations and aspirations to fulfill the educational goals for

Baltimore City school students

2) Works to ensure regulatory compliance

3) Continues to evolve with new technology and updated facility management industry

standards

4) Reports and quantifies performance data for measurable outcomes

Facility Maintenance &

Operations Department

CMP

Magement and Analysis of

Asset Inventory Data

Facilities Planning Department

CEFMP & CIP

Input

ProcessOutcome

Reporting

3

The School Board, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Operating Officer (COO), and Executive

Facility Director, supported by FM&O, strive to provide a safe and healthy learning environment

for students, faculty, and the community while operating our school buildings in an efficient

manner. The district’s maintenance and preventive maintenance (PM) programs are the foundation

necessary to support the educational programs and sustain our facilities.

The relationship between facility maintenance and capital investments is clearly defined and there

is an implied understanding that good maintenance of building systems and equipment will defer

or reduce the need for capital investments. Also, well-timed and judicious use of capital investment

should reduce the burden on maintenance staff, time and resources while prolonging the life of the

building. Both forms of investment are likely to result in better building performance, a reduced

risk of building failure, and savings in operations and utility expenditures. Most importantly, these

combined investments will have positive effects on the health and well-being of building

occupants.

Facility management professionals use 3% of current replacement value (CRV) as a guideline for

the annual investment necessary to maintain school buildings in good condition.

FM&O FY 2019 Operating: $23,140,785

Current Replacement Value: $5 billion

Current Budget as % of CRV: .50%

The maintenance and operations FY 2019 operating budget is $23,140,785. To achieve the

recommended index value (facility operating budget as a percentage of CRV), City Schools would

need to increase the operating budget from approximately $23 million to reach $127 million. This

significant increase to the operating budget funds would bring about a dramatic improvement to

school facilities.

This document highlights specific information related to the Departments’ budget, organizational

components, staffing structure, and strategies over the next five years measured by performance

indicators that were developed in agreement between the IAC and the School Board.

Mission Statement and Goals

City Schools recognizes our schools to be an integral part of communities and that the State of

Maryland, Baltimore City, and city residents support the system’s financial and capital needs. City

Schools is committed to spending resources effectively and efficiently, investing in facilities in a

manner that promotes and improves community vitality, environmental sustainability, and equity

among schools citywide. School facilities are community assets with a direct correlation to home

values and business growth, and significantly contribute to the overall quality of the future of

Baltimore City.

4

The mission and goals of FM&O are to have optimal plant operation capability and to improve,

repair, renovate, maintain, and clean educational facilities through diligent conservation of energy,

management of resources, and efficient and accountable utilization of manpower. Consistent

corrective and preventive maintenance during the 40-year life expectancy of a building can prevent

future costs, as well as minimize shutdowns and loss of educational time.

The Association of Physical Plant Administrators (APPA) has maintenance service levels by

which an organization can determine how a system manages their facilities based on current

practices and resources (there are 5 levels).

Level 1: Showpiece Facility: Maintenance activities appear highly focused. Typically,

equipment and building components are fully functional and in excellent operating condition.

Service and maintenance calls are responded to immediately. Buildings and equipment are

regularly upgraded, keeping them current with modern standards and usage.

Level 2: Comprehensive Stewardship: Maintenance activities appear organized with

direction. Equipment and building components are usually functional and in operating

condition. Service and maintenance calls are responded to in a timely manner. Buildings and

equipment are regularly upgraded, keeping them current with modern standards and usage.

Level 3: Managed Care: Maintenance activities appear to be somewhat organized, but they

remain people-dependent. Equipment and building components are mostly functional, but they

suffer occasional breakdowns. Service and maintenance call response times are variable and

sporadic without apparent cause. Buildings and equipment are periodically upgraded to current

standards and usage, but not enough to control the effects of normal usage and deterioration.

Level 4: Reactive Management: Maintenance activities appear to be somewhat chaotic and

are people-dependent. Equipment and building components are frequently broken and

inoperative. Service and maintenance calls are typically not responded to in a timely manner.

Normal usage and deterioration continues unabated, making buildings and equipment

inadequate to meet present usage needs.

Level 5: Crisis Response: Maintenance activities appear chaotic and without direction.

Equipment and building components are routinely broken and inoperative. Service and

maintenance calls are never responded to in a timely manner. Normal usage and deterioration

continues unabated, making buildings and equipment inadequate to meet present usage needs.

Internal review and data analysis indicates our current management level to be between a Level 3

and 4. Our goal by 2023 is to achieve Level 2.

FM&O continues to experience a growing demand for response to service requests for, but not

limited to indoor air quality, environmental protection, school security, and the increased

complexity of computer-controlled HVAC systems and related mechanical equipment. Increasing

service demands are compounded by property damage caused by extreme weather-related events

and vandalism, financial constraints, and the average age of our facilities being over 50 years.

5

FM&O aligns with the other facility-related departments to effectively address facility needs and

challenges in the District by prioritizing the following five maintenance-specific goals and

objectives:

1. Aspiring Goal: Support the School Board and CEO in maintaining healthy, safe and

positive learning environment for all students and staff.

Objective: Reinforce the learning process by maintaining the interior and exterior of a

school to make it a place that students, school staff and local communities will appreciate

and respect.

2. Aspiring Goal: Ensure schools and office buildings operate in a cost-effective manner with

an emphasis on energy conservation.

Objective: Increase funding to support aging infrastructure and address new 21st Century

facilities

Objective: Focus on Sustainability measures

Objective: Complete all State, city and Federal mandated inspections

3. Aspiring Goal: Ensure responsiveness to address vandalism, accidents, fires and other

safety- or security-related incidents.

Objective: Reduce the number of staff vacancies

Objective: Reduce square footage per FTE

4. Aspiring Goal: Maximize the useful life of the buildings and at the same time reduce

emergency school closings through scheduled and PM programs.

Objective: Plan and direct contractor resources to support PM work

5. Aspiring Goal: Leverage CIP to reduce backlog of DM and perform life-cycle

replacements of major building components and to improve overall facility condition.

Objective: Plan, schedule, and complete repair and PM work orders in a CMMS platform

to track and coordinate work

Maintenance and Operations Overview The COO has general oversight of the FM&O department, with full operational oversight managed

under the Executive Facility Director. The FM&O Department Director and Assistant Directors

are responsible for the annual operating budget and work programs for 165 school and

administrative buildings, and 58 portable classroom buildings. These facilities constitute

approximately 17.7 million square-feet of enclosed space housed over approximately 77 square

miles with a residential population of more than 646,000. City Schools is the fourth largest school

system in the state of Maryland. In school year (SY) 2017-2018, City Schools experienced a

decline in enrollment for the third consecutive year. Operations seeks to accomplish set goals

tracked by metrics and provides accountable and efficient work with quality in-house staff,

6

obtaining outside supplemental requirement vendors with fixed labor rates and markups, energy

conservation and alternative funding resources.

The department’s primary objective is to ensure the retention of fixed assets by means of proper

operation – cleaning, repairing and component replacement throughout the life cycle of equipment

use. Currently, complete PM according to industry standards is not possible due to funding

allocations and the lack of trained personnel. The planned $27 million funding increase to the

FM&O budget would provide additional resources to improve PM by creating a team specifically

for this purpose, incorporating PM expertise throughout the organization and inventorying assets

in all schools by 2019. The SY 2017 reduction of budget funds and elimination of vacant positions

delayed the formation of this planned team and prevented hiring, training and implementation.

City Schools continues to pursue alternative resources: however, the essential funding will need

to be developed for continued improvement of our facilities.

General Organization and Staffing

See Appendix A for Comprehensive Organizational Charts

Chief Operating Officer

7

FM&O has the responsibility under its purview, now designated as part of the Area Facility

Managers (AFM) and Lead Techs (LT) assignments, to inspect and schedule repair services

utilizing the Computerized Management Maintenance Systems (CMMS). FM&O staff performs

routine, corrective, and PM tasks; and, responds to daily emergency service calls and completes

the repair of all facility assets housed within our buildings with in-house staff or by utilizing

contracted services with oversight. Major and specialized tasks including annual boiler service,

major equipment repairs, and maintenance on specialized building systems (i.e. Fire/Life Safety

and Security) are generally performed through procurement of external contracts. City Schools’

maintenance and repair (M&R) funding is insufficient to sustain required PM, repair and renewal.

The backlog of deferred work and overall poor condition reported in a 2011 facilities condition

assessment continues to grow annually.

While the district’s school campuses, grouped into 12 leaning communities, oversee their own

custodial services, FM&O provides guidance, additional e cleaning and other required special

custodial needs during emergency situations. Valuable internal partners in this work are the School

Support Networks. This team is responsible for day-to-day supervision and reporting of facility

maintenance needs of City Schools’ facilities.

FM&O coordinates its resources to align with the latest CEFMP, which currently includes the

21st-Century Buildings Plan and the School Board approved Portfolio Recommendations.

Recent History & Maintenance of Public School Facilities in Baltimore

City

In 2011, City Schools contracted Jacobs Project Management Company to perform a district-wide

facility condition assessment. This assessment measured and analyzed enrollment projections,

building capacities, educational adequacy, building conditions, and the state of building systems.

The results revealed a poor facility condition index rating (FCI1) of 60% across the district, and

estimated a total need of $2.4 billion in replacements, renovations, and maintenance. This

information was then used to create the 21st Century School Buildings Plan, which was adopted

by the School Board in January 2013 as the “blueprint to guide City Schools’ decisions on facilities

usage and investments.” (‘13 CEFMP, page 18). The plan development was supported by several

factors considered in prioritizing projects, including neighborhood conditions, academic

performance and facility conditions. The facility analysis and plan led to the justification for the

passage of HB860, the $1.1 billion financing capacity and the memorandum of understanding

among state, local and Baltimore City Public Schools (City Schools) partners. While the facility

analysis formed the basis of the estimates that led to the number of schools support by the program,

additional analysis and cost estimation was necessary to determine the program could support 23-

28 schools. .

1 The FCI represents an industry and national standard for measuring overall condition of a building or group of

buildings within a buildings portfolio. This index compares the cost of both current repairs to a building and repairs

that are predicted to be necessary over the next 10 years with the cost to replace the building with a brand new one

of the same size. The FCI is represented by a percentage, where the higher the percentage, the poorer the condition

of the building and the better the candidate for replacement versus repairs.

8

21st Century School Buildings Plan

In late March 2013, the vision to transform Baltimore City Schools became partially attainable

with approval of HB860 by the Maryland General Assembly. HB860 authorized a $1.1 billion

financing plan for renovation or replacement of Baltimore public school buildings. It should be

noted that the Jacobs report estimated a total of $2.4 billion needed to replace and renovate existing

buildings over a ten-year period. HB860 was a significant step to launch the 21st Century Building

Plan work..

HB860 also charges four public agencies with managing and overseeing execution of the plan:

• Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners (School Board)

• Maryland Stadium Authority (MSA)

• Interagency Committee on School Construction (IAC)

• City of Baltimore

The Memorandum of Understanding for Baltimore City Schools Construction and Revitalization

Act of 2013 (MOU) among these agencies was signed in Fall 2013 and approved by the Maryland

State Board of Public Works on October 16, 2013. An executive committee, composed of the

above noted four partners, oversees implementation of the MOU.

In the MOU, there are fifteen specific understandings between the agencies. One of those is the

understanding for City Schools to develop a revision of the CMP submitted by October 15 of each

year in accordance with COMAR 23.03.02. Specified in the MOU, a revised and updated CMP is

to be submitted and approved by the School Board and the IAC, “for preventive and ongoing

maintenance of all school buildings, which shall provide for sufficient funding to implement the

CMP.” The CMP was submitted and approved August 12, 2014 and was most recently updated in

August 2017.

FM&O, under the Executive Facility Director, is responsible for implementing the CMP’s five-

year strategy. At a minimum, the CMP must demonstrate specific staffing, budget, and

organizational components to make a significant improvement over the five years following the

date of approval of the CMP by the IAC, as measured by the metrics agreed to by the IAC and the

School Board.

Over the years, the Director of FM&O has been increasingly required to expend a larger percentage

of resources reacting to emergent needs that arise on short notice – emergency repairs, instead of

systematically and strategically addressing scheduled PM. Over the last decade or even years

further, the deferring of essential maintenance for school infrastructure has accumulated to be a

substantial portion of the $2.4 billion needed to replace and renovate the existing buildings. The

City Schools’ facility condition assessment conducted in 2011 identified DM of $976 million and

the cost has continued to increase each year, and at this time is estimated to be just under $3 billion.

At current funding levels, the requirement for basic health- and safety-related M&R has a

cumulative cost that exceeds the total current City Schools’ M&R budget. In addition, these

challenges are further exacerbated by the lack of adequate capital investments due to limited

resources.

In order to fulfill the vision of HB860 and increase the capacity to adequately maintain our

buildings, City Schools’ administration and the School Board have agreed to an additional $3

9

million annual allocation to the FM&O budgets from FY 2015 to 2023. FM&O has concluded this

additional funding will allow the scheduling of preventive M&R by FY2019 and support staffing.

An evaluation of this allocation was conducted by the CEO and CFO, who determined that the

course of action was sufficient to fund appropriate maintenance costs at the time.

Additional requirements of the CMP include the development of a template for a Building

Maintenance Plan (BMP) of individual new, renovated, and existing school buildings; and for the

entire school building inclusive of custodial requirements, during the design phase of any project

in or about a school building for which City Schools has operational responsibility. The BMP at a

minimum must contain a staffing plan for the school building, the budget required to support the

BMP, and custodial requirements.

Another requirement of the CMP include performance metrics which are to, as defined in the

MOU, report on the system-wide maintenance and performance of all school buildings. City

Schools shall measure and report to the STAT Committee for inclusion in the STAT reporting

program the progress toward attainment of the following four metrics:

• Staffing parametric

• Work order parametric

• Inspection parametric

• Implementation of a CMMS system

Progress toward attainment of the metrics as submitted annually shall be a factor considered by

the IAC in the review of 10-Year Plan Projects for approval and the recommended approval of

future CIP projects, consistent with COMAR 23.03.02.03.B(1) and 23.03.02.03.B(2).

In review of the metrics and necessary steps to attain the goals of the metrics, it became clear by

the IAC, Operations team, and the School Board that additional funding and resources were

necessary for the team to achieve performance measures. On August 12, 2014, the School Board

approved the CMP which included a funding adjustment of $27 million investment over nine years

to sustain required maintenance, repair and renewal. Based on this plan, the annual FM&O budget

was projected to increase from $15.5 million in FY 2014 to $28.2 million in FY 2019, which

marked the end of Phase 1 of the 21st Century School Buildings Plan. This funding adjustment

would afford the District to continue to support its existing infrastructure with dedicated funding

to address PM and inspection work, and additionally, support new facilities being renovated or

replaced through the 21st Century School Buildings Plan. Additional funds would specifically

address annual boiler services, major equipment repairs, and maintenance of specialized building

systems. To further improve efforts, the CMP was designed to be aligned with other district-level

plans.

The 21st Century Plan provides a list of 23 to 28 schools to be renovated or replaced by SY

2019/2020 in Phase 1 based on the construction schedule developed in partnership with MSA as

well as the 26 schools to be closed as listed in Exhibit 6 in the MOU. Closures have a significant

impact toward achieving the measures in the CMP.

10

Current Accomplishments

City Schools’ FM&O has achieved significant progress in addressing increasing maintenance and

operations needs across the district. The CMP documents the department’s strategies to address

the School Board’s aspirations, ensure regulatory compliance, continually adapt to the new

technology necessary for industry standards in facility management, and provide all stakeholders

with quantifiable performance outcomes. Ultimately, FM&O strives to retain an optimal learning

environment by providing services that encourage public involvement and community

engagement, while concurrently developing and managing an effective and efficient workforce.

FM&O staff continually seeks solutions to improve operations and service levels. Each month,

Facilities Stat meetings are facilitated by the COO with FM&O managers. The objective of these

meetings is to share performance data, respond to issues with effective tactics and strategy, and

follow up and assess tactics and strategies.

FM&O continues to upgrade work processes and levels of production through continual

development of our workforce and the implementation of various initiatives such as:

• Prioritized student safety, including traffic and commute time to/from school

• Consideration for the interaction of potential decisions with nearby schools

• Coordinated planning and implementation with other agencies that affect neighborhoods

(Planning, Recreation and Parks, etc.)

• Consideration for historical significance

• Consideration for past investment in the school building

• Consideration for potential school and district uses (athletic complex, professional

development center, etc.)

• Consideration of other qualitative factors based on community environment

The COO is committed to support the 21st Century School Buildings Plan and the MOU

requirements through data driven management and decision making, continual performance

improvement, and customer service response. Service and results have changed through the

reorganization and assignment of Lead Technicians (LT) and regional building maintenance

workers under the supervision of the AFM in their 4 respective regional areas, rather than being

centralized and directed as needed. In FY 2019, FM&O will continue to review each assigned

geographic region to evaluate the work order process and procedures being implemented and

followed. The table below shows FM&O Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for FY 2018. One of

the objectives for the CMMS is to have access to these indicators in real time.

• Percentage of open work orders older than 60 days increased by 14.5%

• Average age of open work order decreased by 3.1 days

• Work orders completed in 30 days or less decreased by 3.6%

• Work orders completed in 30 days or more increased by 3.5%

• Average work orders completed each day decreased by 13.2 work orders

• Average days to complete work orders decreased by 3 days

11

FM&O's Key Performance Indicators as of June 30, 2018

Operations FY 2018 FY 2017 FY 2017 vs

FY 2016

Percent of All Open Work Orders 8.8% 7.5% 1.3%

Percent of All Open Work Orders Greater than 60 days 62.5% 48% 14.5%

Average Age of All Work Orders in Days 13 16.1 (3.1)

Average Days to Close Work Orders 9 12.1 (3.1)

Average Hours to Complete Work Orders 1.6 1.9 (0.3)

Average Work Orders per Day Completed 213 226.2 (13.2)

Amount of Completed Work Orders in 15 Days 41,925 46,576 (4,651)

Percentage 79.5% 80.5% (1.0%)

Amount of Completed Work Orders 15 to 30 2,563 4,253 (1690)

Percentage 4.9% 7.4% (2.5)

Amount of Completed Work Orders Over 30 Days 8,264 7,066 1,198

Percentage 15.7% 12.2% 3.5

Amount of Completed Work Orders 52,752 57,895 (5,143)

• With the rollout of mobile technology at the ground level for real time capturing of work

and with the implementation of daily process guides and regular follow up for stronger

accountability, Operations is more accurately capturing and recording information. This in

return has improved the quality of data.

• FY1718 is the first year that staff on the ground closed their own work orders. In July 2017,

FM&O reorganized the Building Maintenance and Inspection Division and eliminated the

EBS positions. The EBS, and in some shops the administrative support, was responsible

for closing work orders for staff in the field. In October 2017 technicians were trained on

and given iPads to close out work orders in real time. 65% of the workforce was not familiar

technology, so it has been a steep learning curve. Often, staff added labor hours, but left

the work order open or forgot to hit save leaving the work order unsaved and in an open

status, which in return has impacted the age of work orders. Staff have grown more

confident with the use of technology and we anticipate seeing improvement in age of work

orders.

• The structure of the regional maintenance blitz cycle allows us to close work orders within

2 weeks of creating them; however; if new issues are identified after the blitz or teams

couldn’t complete all identified work in a single visit, that work order would sit for at least

another 2 months before the blitz team could circle back around to that school.

12

In addition, Operations and FM&O leadership has continued to achieve the following:

• Participation in the publication of a CEFMP and continual review and input of the 21st

Century Buildings Plan.

• Continual development of a more comprehensive PM plan.

• Gradual decrease in the backlog of DM as funds allow.

• Value-added use of supplemental funding resources, including the mitigation and

replacement of several aged and problematic underground storage tanks, grease traps,

asphalt and concrete replacement, and storm water drain lines.

• Efficient operations – the current staff is functioning very efficiently by stressing

accountability, reliability and skill-set improvement. Efficiency is monitored through work

order performance data and measures which are routinely examined and reviewed with

FM&O managers.

• Good relationship with police and emergency responders, resulting in decreased response

times for emergency calls specific to facilities, life-safety, and security.

Challenges

City Schools is an urban school district. In SY17-18 71,789 students were enrolled in 171 programs

that were housed in 159 school buildings. The buildings in City Schools’ portfolio also includes 6

administrative buildings. FM&O is diligently committed to provide timely and consistent quality

service in all facilities by leveraging the capabilities of its five maintenance groups under its

managerial and fiscal purview. These groups include Building Maintenance and Inspections,

Contract Maintenance, Engineering and Mechanical Services, Repair Shop, and Grounds.

The following challenges currently exist within City Schools' building portfolio:

Emergency Repairs: City Schools’ portfolio is comprised of a significant number of older

structures averaging over 50 years in age. The maintenance effort for the repair of unforeseen

breakdowns or failures to critical building systems and equipment is a significant component

of FM&O’s daily workload. These types of repairs typically include full or temporary repairs

to critical safety, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, and security systems. The extent and

severity of the emergency repairs were clearly evident and illustrated during the winter of

2017/2018 causing numerous school closures due to the extensive repair work of essential

operating systems.

Air Conditioning: The essential need for conditioned spaces in our buildings through the use

of portable window air conditioning units has increased dramatically across the district,

requiring significant resources devoted to operating and maintaining these generally inefficient

units in good working order. In 2017, there was a State initiative to install window air

conditioning units or portable systems in schools to provide students and teachers with air-

conditioned classrooms. The older electrical systems in our buildings create additional

challenges and impacts the installation of these types of air-conditioning units. The district is

implementing the installation of self-contained vertical packaged HVC units in large high

schools and elementary and middle schools slated in later years of the CIP for full HVAC.

13

Vandalism and Security-Related Repairs: Unforeseen repairs caused to the equipment and

fixed assets in our buildings represents a significant cost and includes labor and materials

related to restoring or temporarily fixing property damaged due to the intentional vandalism of

school property of all kinds. Vandalism may also require the installation of additional

prevention mechanisms that will add to the long-term equipment maintenance duties of

FM&O.

Breaking and Entry Repairs: This frequent occurrence in city school buildings requires

additional maintenance man-hours and materials to correct unforeseen damage. Work typically

includes repairs to windows, doors, locks and affected equipment within the facility.

Fire Repairs: Maintenance to fully or temporarily repair damage caused by fire.

Increased Wear: Urban school districts are typically subjected to a higher degree of wear than

suburban school districts, as many serve as community schools. These types of schools

buildings experience higher use outside of typical educational learning hours, due to before

and after school programming and use of facilities on the weekends and during summer

months.

Utility and Technological Infrastructure: The increasing demand necessary to respond to

insufficient technology infrastructure requires a dramatic increase for power and HVAC

capacity prior to or after the installation of updated equipment.

Toxic Materials: Schools experience issues with toxic materials such as asbestos and lead.

When these materials are disturbed or discovered, reactive cleanup is required; FM&O must

respond in a timely fashion in order to maintain the safe function of the facility and to avoid

educational interruption.

Infrastructure Degradation outside City Schools Boundaries: Issues often occur within the

school property line as the result of infrastructure failures that take place outside the school

property but are still the responsibility of City Schools’ FM&O. These types of failures

typically include, but are not limited to water, sewer, and storm drain lines.

Special Events: Maintenance to prepare for and fully or temporarily repair damage caused by

the various special events that occur due to external partner usage at our school facilities. These

event are monitored by the district real estate office.

Daycare placement: This usage in unused school space is presenting challenges to renovate

these areas to conform to local fire safety and building codes. Additional maintenance

challenges are presented for infant care compliance.

Aging Building Systems: The advanced age of mechanical systems is the biggest facilities-

related challenge to our school system. To address this challenge and update these systems,

the following initiatives will be implemented:

• Bring all current systems online (viewable)

• All sites without current controls will have minimal monitoring capability

14

• Integrate site with non-contracted controls to one viewing source

• Begin to upgrade non-remote controlled sites to have monitoring only capability with

minimum control features

• Transparency to allow the public to view current building climate conditions

• Maintain and upgrade systems as required

Funding

General Operating Budget

City Schools allocates a budgeted sum of funding for FM&O each year. In addition to what is

budgeted, FM&O has in the past supplemented its funding with additional dollars from the City

Schools Office of Finance.

Beginning in FY 2010, the ability to secure temporary State supplemental funding (Aging School

Program and Alcohol Supplemental Appropriations) was an alternative strategy to support M&R

expenditures, to offset the decrease of allocated funding within the annual operating budget. The

deferred and backlogged projects (asphalt and concrete refurbishment, underground storage tank

replacement, etc.) were typically funded by this type of temporary supplemental funding. FM&O

continues to obtain State financial alternative funding when available.

In 2014, the Board committed to increasing Operations budget to support needed PM and repairs

in facilities. The $3 million per year committed by the School Board will also allow the Office of

Operations to create more than 39 full-time positions for repairs and maintenance.

The 2014 approved CMP was initiated to balance FM&O growth with capital renewal initiatives

under HB860 to allow City Schools to adequately maintain the building portfolio while

simultaneously meeting the many goals outlined in the City Schools’ CEFMP. City Schools’

projected adequate funding in PM and unscheduled maintenance by year FY 2020. However, the

reduction of fiscal resources may impact Operations’ ability to schedule and perform routine PM

and corrective maintenance. Replacement of equipment at the end of its life-cycle will require

funding from other sources.

In FY 2017 the Office of Finance, as in previous years, had provided supplemental funding to

support operating budget shortfalls. A reduction in overall funding resulted in the Department’s

increase of deferred projects. The reduced budget impacted scheduled preventative maintenance

projects, limiting projects only to essential repairs. The outcome of funding shortfalls continues to

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22FY23-

25*

Maintenance

commitment$3M $6M $8M $11M $14M $17M $20M $23M $26M

15

affect FM&O with the increase and growing number of deferred projects and the additional burden

to maintain and operate the older school buildings.

Unfortunately, in FY 2017 City Schools was faced with a severe financial crisis causing the

reduction of this dedicated funding to help cover the shortfall. Budgetary reductions were needed

to minimize further fiscal impacts and to the Chief Operations Officer budget was decreased to

$2 million; however, this contribution still represented an increase from past funding proposed and

dedicated for PM scheduling and tasks. Any current and proposed vacant positions were eliminated

to support the budgetary reduction in the Office of Operations, however positions were available

and advertised in FY 2018.

In FY 2018 City Schools Facility Operations received the additional $3 million for preventative

maintenance work and support staffing identified in the CMP five-year strategic plan despite

efforts and attempts to close a district-wide $130 million budget gap. Key drivers for the budget

gap include:

• Increased cost of health care for staff

• Commitments under the 21st Century School Buildings Plan

• Increased labor costs

• Declining enrollments, reducing the amount of State funding based on the current

education formula, the Kirwan formula.

The increases for FY 18 are demonstrated below in the various department categories. Increases

made to the preventative maintenance line item supported mechanical and non-mechanical service

trades and added additional staffing to support the repairs restructuring to further support PM work.

The budget adjustment will address staffing levels to adequately support facilities’ needs and

challenges, and more importantly, provide additional funding for PM to ensure our facilities stay

online, up to, and beyond the industry’s life cycle. Increased investment in staffing will ensure

appropriate oversight and support to address facilities’ deficiencies or minor challenges. Staffing

increases will reduce reliance on contractors, that at times, lack historical knowledge of City

Schools’ facilities, and often present variation in support of facilities based on their own staffing

and capacity limitations.

Cost Center Name FY 18 Budget FY 19 Proposed

Solid Waste Removal $ 1,260,000 $ 1,260,000

Grounds Shop $ 2,565,309 $ 2,614,821

FY18 FY19

Repair Shop $ 2,363,488 $ 2,456,800

Contract Maintenance $ 2,994,304 $ 2,900,753

Mechanical Services $ 2,347,272 $ 2,273,629

Preventive Maintenance $ 10,926,372 $ 13,925,494

Engineering $ 1,586,496 $ 1,584,109

$ 20,217,932 $ 23,140,785

16

*Assumes 16,468,131 sqft in 2023 with the addition of $3M through 2023 with no reduction in the operating

budget

Capital Budget

The most accurate method to identify the future maintenance budget and capital investment needs

of any building involves a detailed facility condition assessment. Combining this data with a life-

cycle cost analysis, which is determined by capturing the inventory of all building elements,

evaluating the current condition of each, in addition to the use of industry literature and other

sources, provides a determination of both annual maintenance requirements and long-term capital

replacement timeframes. This analysis also is helpful as it assigns an inflation-adjusted figure to

each line item for a 20 to 30-year time period.

To assess the condition of school buildings, facility management professionals use a facility

condition index (FCI), which is used to determine the necessary funding level through re-

investment needed to prevent the growth of DM. The index is derived by dividing the total repair

cost, including educational adequacy and site-related repairs, by the total replacement cost for the

set of facilities. The FCI of an individual building can be maintained by well-planned and

scheduled tasks and is improved through capital investment; however, inadequate maintenance or

delayed capital investment will unavoidably lead to an increase of the FCI. It is essential to

acknowledge all building systems age through normal wear, but good maintenance delays this

process. Additionally, it must be noted the original quality of construction contributes to long-term

facility condition. If less initial quality is executed, the facility will age faster or need additional

maintenance attention.

FY17 FY18 FY19FY23

(Projected)

Annual Budget $20,217,932 $18,868,282 $23,140,785 $35,140,785

Cost/sqft $1.15 $1.08 $1.31 $2.13

$-

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

$2.50

$-

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

$30,000,000

$35,000,000

$40,000,000

Co

st/s

qft

Bu

dge

t

17

Total Area, Average FCI and Average Age of City Schools by School Type: This figure displays

the overall size, condition and age of the entire City Schools' portfolio, by school type with FCI

values greater than 20% representing worse condition. It shows an average building age of over 50

years and overall poor condition. 2

The figure above was derived from the data results of the 2012 Jacobs report, showing the average

age of facilities and average FCI by school type.

Baltimore City data analysis indicates our overall school building FCI to be 60%. Industry

standards provided through associations and agencies, such as the International Facility

Management Association (IFMA), a professional association which exists to guide and develop

facility management professionals, considers the FCI score of 20% to represent the worst

conditions. This score does not mean our school buildings are unsafe or ineffective, but clearly is

an indication our buildings are showing severe signs of deterioration in many cases with numerous

systems reaching or exceeding the end of their life cycles.

The facility management industry establishes a strong link between maintenance and capital

investment.. Maintenance is a continuum of activities ranging from predicting and preventing

failures, to capital improvements or renovations, with repair and support maintenance and

operations in the center of all activities.

Of greater concern, as indicated through data analysis, Baltimore City Schools has a DM value of

$3 billion. Over the last ten years City Schools has received an average of $47 million per year to

replace aging school buildings or antiquated equipment and systems, such as roofs, boilers,

chillers, windows, elevators and life-safety equipment. This funding includes a State contribution

of approximately $30 million and a City contribution of $17 million. For FY 2019, the City

increased its contribution to $19 million.

2 The FCI represents an industry and national standard for measuring overall condition of a building or group of buildings within

a buildings portfolio. This index compares the cost of both current repairs to a building and repairs that are predicted to be

necessary over the next 10 years with the cost to replace the building with a brand new one of the same size. The FCI is

represented by a percentage, where the higher the percentage, the poorer the condition of the building and the better the candidate

for replacement versus repairs.

18

Facility Deferred Maintenance (DM) $3 Billion

Condition Index = ------------------------------------ = ------------------ = 60%

(FCI) Current Replacement (CRV) $5 Billion

Value

Taking into account the additional $1 billion in bond funding provided by HB860, the 21st Century

Building Fund, over the next 10 years DM will be reduced fractionally as 21st Century schools

represent approximately 17% of the portfolio, as deferred work continues to increase in the other

80% of the portfolio. To effectively reduce or maintain DM over the next decade City Schools’

annual City capital budget contribution would have to increase by 50%. The average age of our

school buildings is over 50 years and with each passing year it will become more and more difficult

to maintain learning environment in each facility with the limited funding resources.

5 year Plan: Facility and Maintenance FY 2018 - FY 2022

SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20 SY20-21 SY21-22

21st Century Buildings

Plan & CEFMP

FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022

CMP Year 1 CMP Year 2 CMP Year 3 CMP Year 4 CMP Year 5

Total Square Footage 17,908,736 17,914,161 17,819,308 17,308,996 17,367,551

Closed/Decreased SF (63,205) (271,698) (510,312) (268,719) (708,700)

Added SF 68,630 176,845 0 327,274 136,397

SF to Maintain 17,914,161 17,819,308 17,308,996 17,367,551 16,795,248

District School Buildings

Total School Bldgs 160 159 156 155 151

Closed School Bldgs -1 -3 -1 -4 -6 School Bldgs to

Maintain 159 156 155 151 145

To link the management of the capital budget to the general operating budget, there is

demonstration of ongoing challenges to maintain the existing portfolio with the existing budget.

Throughout the facility management industry, professionals commonly use percentages of current

replacement value (CRV) as a guideline for the annual investment necessary to maintain school

buildings in good condition. A value of 3% is recommended for public schools.3

FM&O FY 2019 Operating: $23,140,785

Current Replacement Value: $5 billion

Current Budget as % of CRV: .50%

3 State of Our Schools: America’s K-12 facilities is a joint publication of the 21st century School fund, Inc.,

U.S. Green Building Council, Inc., and the national Council on School facilities

19

The maintenance and operations FY 2019 operating budget is $23,140,785 and includes all

activities associated with the routine, day-to-day use, support, and maintenance of facilities.

Specifically, the funding provides preventive and corrective maintenance, pest control, snow

removal, landscaping, trash removal, and utility charges (electric, gas/oil, water). To achieve a 3%

index value (facility operating budget as a percentage of CRV), City Schools would need to

increase the operating budget $127 million to achieve the nationally recommended 3% ($150

million). Were such a vast increase to occur, the operating budget funds would bring about a

significant improvement to school facilities.

Therefore, with limited resources, the Operations department will have to explore more strategic

methods to implement day to day repair and maintenance tasks, explore alternative funding

mechanism such as performance contracting to support replacement of systems, identify

supplemental resources and focus on a lean staffing model.

Unfunded Mandates

The continual creation of proposed and pending new State regulations and requirements places a

heavy burden on the existing availability and usage of maintenance funding. New regulations

ultimately lead to the improvement of school facilities conditions; however, the current and near-

future funding needed to sustain such improvement is not available to fulfill such obligations at

this time. Moreover, mandates must be supported with State or local level supplemental dollars for

complete compliance.

Facility Maintenance & Operations Staffing

The FM&O department is comprised of 195 personnel with skill sets ranging from basic

mechanical skill to highly skilled tradesman. Of the on-site maintenance work completed in our

school buildings, 65% of the staff completes the work orders. Our AFMs and LTs are centrally

located at our Repair Shop and travel to the facilities to oversee their assigned teams to complete

captured and reported maintenance work orders, inspect for maintenance deficiencies and interact

with our building occupants to provide the highest level of customer service.

In 2017, FM&O reorganized the Building Maintenance and Inspection Division and eliminated

the Educational Building Supervisors (EBS) positions, consolidated into the new position title of

Lead Technician (LT). The LTs are supervised by the AFMs and are responsible for the daily

oversight and reporting of facility maintenance needs of City Schools’ facilities. The AFMs

coordinate and communicate closely with LTs to ensure all facility-related work orders are

reported and completed in a timely manner. Additionally, a new position, Assistant Director of

Building Maintenance and Inspections was created. The Assistant Director oversees the Repair

Shop, organized as 3 school facility regions managed by the AFMs; as well as, Contract

Maintenance and the Grounds Shop. Each region is composed of approximately 60 school

buildings and each regional AFM has a team of 2 LTs, and a minimum of 6 Building Maintenance

Workers (BMW). These numbers and structures have changes for FY 2019.

Each region's school buildings are inspected for corrective and emergency maintenance

corrections six times per year. Regions follow a rotating inspection and maintenance schedule

20

called a "Blitz Cycle", which is approximately eight weeks long. Work orders for needed repairs

are entered in SchoolDude be scheduled and completed during their scheduled "Blitz" day. A blitz

is when a team of technicians perform corrective maintenance in a school building to resolve

identified maintenance issues in a single visit. City Schools hopes to increase its number of blitz

cycles in the future as additional staff are added. As we increase the number of maintenance visits

and the regional teams become more proficient with the use of SchoolDude, our trended

maintenance performance data should show the swing toward planned and scheduled routine

maintenance repair and a decrease in reactive or unplanned maintenance activities.

Due to fiscal constraint and reductions in FY 2017, additional proposed and vacant positions were

eliminated to meet the Office of Operations budget goals. In FY 2018 and moving forward in

future years, City Schools hopes to continue filling open and vacant facility positions to improve

coverage, reduce total square footage per FTE, and improve response times by in-house staff to

requested service calls.

The Contract Maintenance Division, with 12 FTEs, is responsible for the management of PM

contracts and services. This group manages a large network of contractors that provide services

for the preventive maintenance and repair (M&R) of large or specialized building systems

including (but not limited to) HVAC systems, electrical switchgear, motor control centers and

generator systems, vertical transportation systems, fire alarm and suppression systems, and

security systems.

Mechanical Services and Facilities Engineering manages PM and minor renewal projects related

to the M&R of mechanical equipment and plumbing systems. These are the systems that support

the function, performance and comfort in the facilities. Mechanical Services Division consists of

6 FTEs and utilizes contractual support to provide mechanical resources to ensure operation of

21

mechanical systems. Two FTEs have been assigned to coordinate the Preventive Maintenance

Program and startup.

Engineering consists of 42 engineering and technician positions that provide limited services for

proper operation of mechanical equipment. To prepare for the management of new 21st Century

funded buildings, 16 of these positions were recently created and funded. Staff will be trained to

maintain and support new HVAC systems and will be trained in the use of new automated

technology to monitor and control these systems; however, this training will not replace the need

for supplemental contractual support for regular and specialized services. These two departments

are combined under the oversight of a newly created Assistant Director of Mechanical Services

and Engineering.

Facility Inspections and Full-Building Audits

City Schools employs a wide variety of inspections to ensure the safe and effective operation of

district facilities. These inspections are designed to trigger PM routines to ensure official

regulatory, audit and quality compliance.

Regulatory Inspections of City Schools’ facilities are performed on a regular, or an as-needed,

basis by the following entities (refer to Table D18 on page 47):

• State of Maryland inspections regularly assess emergency readiness and fire extinguisher

compliance. Compliance for these two inspections is managed by City Schools’ Health and

Safety.

• Baltimore City Fire Marshal conducts biannual inspections of City Schools’ fire alarm

equipment and evacuation procedures to ensure safe operations and protocol. Baltimore

City Fire Prevention Bureau provides coordinated support in the teaching and testing of

Fire extinguisher inspections and COMAR regulations that pertain to school sites.

Resulting deficiencies from these inspections are typically addressed by Contract

Maintenance. Other issues that may arise from these inspections include improper storage

of school materials, which are then addressed internally by each school. City Schools’

familiarity with these inspections and proclivity in performing internal inspections has

reduced the number of violations that result from each inspection.

• Baltimore City Health Department conducts inspections of health suites, swimming pools,

and food preparation and storage areas. City Schools also conducts thorough internal

cleanliness inspections four times per year. City Schools maintains a comprehensive pool

maintenance procedure to ensure safe, healthy and cleanly operation. The regularity and

scope of all inspections assists FM&O in being proactive in maintenance and staying ahead

of evolving policies and regulations.

• State of Maryland Department of Agriculture conducts inspection of pest control measures

to ensure that City Schools is employing proper means and methods. City Schools performs

regular pest inspection and provides staff with guidance on pest control measures to avoid

regular and expensive deficiencies that may affect occupant safety.

22

Comprehensive Educational Facilities Master Plan

Annually, City Schools publishes a Comprehensive Educational Facility Master Plan. The CEFMP

is a guidance tool which provides City Schools’ system administrators, teachers, community

stakeholders, and City and State elected officials with a clear and concise long-range plan to

address facilities related strategies and includes components of the 2012 21st Century Buildings

Plan. The CEFMP highlights changing building and spatial needs of the City Schools system and

prescribes long-range solutions to address facilities’ challenges. The CEFMP also serves as an

integral part of the City Schools’ CIP which lists major facilities investments underway and

planned. City Schools’ programmatic and instructional initiatives and their impact on educational

facilities usage are also highlighted in the plan.

Both the CEFMP and the 21st Century Buildings Plan establish far-reaching goals that are relevant

and should significantly improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the FM&O division. The

increased investment in facilities and focus on renovating, replacing or closing schools that are in

the poorest conditions effectively begin to buy-down the DM and life-cycle costs that otherwise

burden the already decreasing FM&O M&R budget.

Capital Improvement Plan

City Schools' capital funding has not kept pace with the scheduled replacement needs for large

building systems. FM&O maintains a Backlog of Maintenance and Repair Report that identifies

major building systems that are beyond their industry-standard lifespan.

This listing is evaluated relative to the development (or update) of City Schools' CIP. Prioritized

projects are included in the Annual Update, and are adopted based on needs to improve a building

for instructional purposes or to make major systemic repairs due to the age or condition of an

individual building system. Some of these improvements are necessary based on local evaluations

by maintenance staff of building condition, while others are in response to state/federal mandates.

Types of projects in this category may include; lab renovations, roof replacements, mechanical

projects, flooring replacement, energy management and conservation, parking, access road,

athletic field, or playground improvements.

Working with Planning and Design & Construction, these projects are combined with other capital

projects, prioritized, and compiled into a final plan provided in the annually submitted CIP.

23

CIP Prioritization Process/Project Review

Sample CIP Project Review

The listing below identifies the 40 systemic projects requested in the FY 2019 CIP.

Replacement (2)

Roof replacement (6)

Roof/HVAC (1)

Roof/Structural (1)

Fire Safety projects (9)

HVAC projects (4)

Structural/Windows (1)

Roof/Windows/Doors (1)

Roof/HVAC/Windows/Doors (1)

Vertical Package Classroom AC Units (12)

24

Timeframe for the Capital Project Review Cycle

A project selection process has been developed to aid in developing this list of projects for the CIP.

FM&O maintains inventory/list of assets (deferred, life-cycle end, not previously funded CIP) and

identifies needs in each facility. During the project identification, items are reviewed in regard to

the potential project, such as whether the project was partially funded, the age of building systems,

PM inspection reports, and interviews with in-house and contractual FM&O staff.

In the identification of projects phase, projects are collected from all trades represented in City

Schools’ Operations, and will include projects requested by the CEO or Academics. Projects will

be identified based on:

• Priority plan in effect (i.e., roof replacements within their 20-year life span)

• Lifecycle replacement needed

• High maintenance cost

• Replacement benefits

• Academic impact (i.e., replacement of chiller/boiler will ensure proper cooling/heating,

thus school closures will be avoided)

Each project will then be assessed from the standpoint of the condition of the existing item, the

educational impact of the project, the financial impact of the project, and the alignment with

facility plans or coordination with other projects. Input from Design and Construction on intended

special projects (i.e., Weinberg) is obtained. Systemic project priorities which have been identified

by the System are determined.

A review of the school capacity, enrollment and 21st Century Planning year occurs to determine

project eligibility. Contractual Maintenance, Mechanical Services, Engineering, and Energy will

determine the required scope of project, and Design and Construction will provide cost estimates

and further scope refinement for each project. The Facilities Team jointly will review projects and

determine priorities based on goals and/or emergent needs and the CIP documents will then be

prepared.

January-February

•Project Review: Review current deferred projects, future needs, and projects previously submitted and not awarded.

March-May

•Project Priority Setting: Align projects in priority based on systemic project priorities.

June-July

•Finalize CIP project list: Align the development of the project list with the CEFMP and CMP submissions.

25

Comprehensive Maintenance Plan

One significant milestone of the MOU has been the approval by the IAC of the revised CMP, as

mentioned previously. The success of the CMP will ultimately be measured by the district’s ability

to sufficiently maintain all facilities.

The first phase in the development of the new CMP was to organize the basic framework for the

plan, documenting the history and current state of the City Schools maintenance program, as well

developing a parametric understanding of how City Schools compares with industry standards and

comparable districts. This phase concluded with a set of parametric recommendations.

The second phase for the new CMP was to establish specific strategies and techniques for

specifying and implementing the plan from Phase 1. These strategies focused on areas of

anticipated improvement, such as the development and implementation of new staffing parameters

and adequate budgeting and deployment of maintenance funds and resources.

The third element of the CMP is the acquisition and implementation of a new CMMS

(SchoolDude). On January 12, 2016, the School Board approved to piggyback the Association of

Educational Purchasing Association’s (AEPA) competitively solicited contract with SchoolDude

to provide a CMMS in accordance with the 21st Century MOU. SchoolDude best suits City

Schools’ need because of its extensive experience in the K-12 environment. It is a 21st century

technological solution that manages more than just repairs, but also physical plant assets, PM, store

room inventory, and work plans. The MSA was a vital partner in the procurement and funding of

this system.

SchoolDude is managed by the Assistant Director of Building Maintenance and Inspections and

in its third year of implementation and will continue to capture data allowing for more accurate

performance measure analysis. This information holds the FM&O organization accountable as

well as promotes the continual improvement of the department’s operational goals.

The new CMMS provides City Schools the analytic programming ability necessary to transform

the reporting methodology for school buildings to accurately measure and manage progress and

improvement. The system helps to monitor improvements achieved translating into a captured

return on investment dollars. Ultimately, this will allow a greater portion of budget monies to be

allocated toward preventative maintenance. Specifically, the increased ability to perform

continuous diagnostics, detect equipment faults and provide real-time tracking, and the ability to

allow earlier detection of system and equipment issues capturing more budget dollars for

investment. In addition, better building performance will contribute to a more productive

environment. As City Schools strategically consolidates schools and decreases space

requirements, additional resources can be utilized to enhance preventative maintenance operations.

Prior to utilizing SchoolDude, FM&O staff and temporary contract staff had provided City Schools

the ability to initiate and start inventory of the critical building assets in building. The inventory

process started in the schools scheduled for renovation or replacement starting in year ten and

continuing downward through year three. This work by temporary contractors was eliminated upon

the hiring of SchoolDude for their CMMS service as well as their extensive Facility Condition

Assessment service, which was purchased to maximize the value of our SchoolDude investment.

26

SchoolDude is associated with a national consulting firm, EMG, who is their exclusive provider

of field services related to the on-site physical inspection of the equipment required to set up the

SchoolDude capital forecast and PM applications. EMG has certified staff in place to perform field

functions related to the inventory of equipment and configuration of PM tasks necessary for

SchoolDude maintenance software implementation.

SchoolDude/EMG are now in year three of a four-year assessment of schools not included in the

21st Century Buildings Plan and will provide a facility condition inventory through the PMDirect

module within the SchoolDude software package. The field data collection and condition

assessment is meant to capture information of all major building systems to the individual

component level, including all components considered capital repair items (as opposed to

maintenance-level items). This includes site paving, HVAC, roofing, electrical, plumbing, vertical

transportation systems, building envelope and structural systems.

The assessment is broken into two phases each year:

PHASE 1

• Facility Condition Assessment

• Detailed Facility Condition Assessment

• Full Narrative Report of Assessment

• Asset Inventory Collection (Data Gathering)

• Import into SchoolDude's Capital Forecast Direct and PMDirect (data also provided in Excel)

PHASE 2

• PM Implementation

• PM Tasking and Generation

27

28

Concurrent with the continuation of CMMS’s implementation is the ongoing population of

physical plant assets in schools renovated or replaced with 21st Century financing. To manage

these new building assets, the architects and engineers for new and renovated 21st Century

School Buildings will provide fixed asset data which will be uploaded into the CMMS. This will

allow for planning and delivery of life-cycle replacement and PM schedules for assets. City

schools continues to utilize the PMDirect module from SchoolDude for services to inventory

school assets in the remaining schools not replaced or renovated and the data integrated into the

CMMS. By FY 2020, all critical building assets will be inventoried and integrated into the

CMMS.

Two additional deliverables were requested for the next steps of the CMP implementation.

1. Templates for the Building Maintenance Plan for new, renovated and existing facilities:

The Building Maintenance Plan (BMP) was submitted to the PSCP and accepted as a

template to provide individual building plans. These BMPs serve as a working tool identify

all facility assets with PM schedules and associated cost for strategized budgetary planning

to sustain all identified equipment.

Specific metrics of performance for FM&O: In partnership with the PSCP, City Schools’

staff will develop performance measures by which progress toward attainment of staffing

parameters, work order parameters; inspection parameters and implementation of the

CMMS are monitored. Metrics have been submitted and approved by the IAC and MSA.

Data will be measured, reviewed and used to analyze operations and be included with the

overall evaluations. Metrics are included in Appendix D.

Definitions

Scheduled Maintenance

City Schools’ maintenance technicians visit the buildings daily and complete tours prior to full

occupancy. If staff identify deficiencies that could delay or prevent school opening, personnel are

onsite to initiate corrective action to correct the deficiency. Maintenance communicates and

notifies school administration to allow timely decisions regarding occupancy. The first pass

inspection walk-thru also provides maintenance personnel the opportunity to identify minor

deficiencies, and to issue corrective work orders that address these potential problems. In the

future, as additional data and asset inventory is populated into SchoolDude. FM&O will have the

ability to track the percentage of total corrective maintenance entered which will serve as a key

performance indicator (KPI) and will minimize disruption to the learning environment by

identifying issues before school administration and occupants identify and reported failures. As

21st Century Schools come on line over the next 6 years, building upgrades, building automation

systems and computerized monitoring and reporting will supplement and eventually replace much

of the routine first pass function.

Preventive Maintenance

Preventive maintenance (PM) performs pre-defined maintenance tasks on a regular schedule,

regardless of equipment condition. Cleaning, inspecting, and servicing a chiller at the end of the

29

cooling season is one example of PM. Successful PM programs have two primary components –

an accurate, up-to-date equipment inventory, and equipment-specific procedures defining service

schedules and tasks.

City Schools uses national standards and recommended best practices to perform PM scheduling

and maintenance work on facility equipment. Built into this type of work order are estimates of

labor-hours necessary to provide these tasks. As SchoolDude is populated with our complete asset

inventory for all school buildings with the dedicated PM tasks, we will have an accurate estimate

of the labor-hours necessary to perform all PM protocols necessary as recommended by nationally

recognized standards.

Our PM activity and scheduling can be analyzed in the following ways:

• Labor-hours required annually to execute all scheduled PM

• PM on-time completion rate (within 30 days of issue)

• Percent labor-hours allocated to PM

• Percent labor-hours allocated to customer service requests

Predictive Maintenance

Predictive maintenance of the systems and equipment while monitoring normal operation detects

irregular conditions that require investigation and perhaps proactive repair. This approach offers

cost savings over PM because technicians need only perform maintenance work when warranted,

as opposed to work based on a regular schedule. When possible, predictive maintenance

encourages the identification of specific problems before equipment failure and allows for the

timely scheduling of necessary repair to prevent classroom inference as well as education

interruption. As future resources are identified and staff positions are added, Predictive

maintenance will yield substantial benefit, and will justify additional staff positions to capture PM

activities resulting in long term savings.

Unscheduled Maintenance

Corrective Maintenance

Corrective maintenance results from the defects and deficiencies identified during scheduled

routine maintenance repairs. Typically, when a maintenance technician identifies equipment

failure during scheduled maintenance, the technician performs the repair at the time. When this is

not possible the technician may determine the work must be deferred if the repair required for

correction is too extensive and beyond the technicians ability or timeframe, or if parts are

unavailable. A work order is then created in SchoolDude to record the time, effort and cost

associated with the repair. FM&O uses this data for KPIs, which help to evaluate PM effectiveness.

Specifically, if PM is too frequent or not enough. As City Schools captures additional data in the

CMMS and can trend and identify program needs, FM&O will be in position to strategically

initiate more meaningful data driven maintenance decisions.

Emergency Maintenance

Unplanned maintenance is the repair activity that cannot be programmed or forecasted, such as

emergency repairs, equipment breakdown repair, and customer service requests responding to

failures that may cause the shut-down of an educational facility. FM&O satisfies these needs

utilizing AFMs, LTs, Community and Repair Shop technicians, and custodial staff, as well as

30

contracted services. During a facility emergency, an immediate and appropriate response is

essential to reduce damage, quickly remediate, and communicate concerns by disrupted building

occupants. FM&O trains our facility staff and trains custodial teams on utility shut-offs and

remediation techniques. The FM&O managers deploy in-house and contractual technicians to

make repairs immediately. FM&O also has contracts in place with qualified on-call contractors

when emergencies require large-scale mobilization for cleanup and repair.

Deferred Maintenance

Deferred maintenance (DM) refers to the renewal, replacement, and maintenance projects and

activities postponed due to insufficient funding. Incomplete PM or corrective maintenance work

orders captured in the CMMS result in DM. The cumulative number of deferred work orders are a

real time indicator of the overall condition of facilities. Generally, when the data trend shows an

increase in DM this may indicate and predict higher overall maintenance costs, unplanned asset

failure, and in some cases, will have health and safety implications in the buildings. There are

several types of DM:

• Regulatory/Compliance - Facilities that conform to the regulations and codes in effect at

the time of original construction. As the buildings have aged during their typical life-cycle,

new codes and requirements emerge that City Schools cannot defer until a planned

renovation – typically these are safety and environmental protection concerns. City Schools

has completed, or has plans and funds to complete the necessary modifications and

upgrades. In general, all other regulatory-driven upgrades are deferred until the facility

undergoes renovation or replacement.

• Major Maintenance Repair (cost greater than $100,000) - The CIP must address these

needs. City Schools does not appropriate resources in FM&O’s annual operating budget

for this purpose. These projects often include replacement of HVAC systems, roofs, pools,

windows and doors.

• Minor Maintenance Repair (valued at less than $100,000) - Maintenance must respond to

these needs using resources identified in the annual operating budget. Individual shops

within FM&O maintain lists of outstanding projects. This data is now incorporated into

SchoolDude capturing all current DM, which can now be collated and evaluated in the

same manner as CIP-funded needs.

31

APPENDIX A 2018-2019 Organizational Chart

32

33

34

35

APPENDIX B Budget and Staffing Scenarios Based on 2014 CMP

Appropriate maintenance budget and staffing levels are critical to the long-term success of the 21st

Century Buildings Plan and are necessary to meet all the requirements of HB860 and in the MOU.

The MOU states, "At a minimum, the CMP must demonstrate specific staffing, budget, and

organizational components to make significant improvement..." Furthermore, sufficient capital

renewal to perform major repair and replacement is essential to maintaining and improving the

overall condition of the City Schools’ portfolio.

This plan balances FM&O with Capital Renewal and CIP, which allows City Schools to adequately

maintain the portfolio of replaced, renovated and schools not covered by 21st Century financing,

while simultaneously meeting the many goals outlined in the 2017 CEFMP.

• Comparison of current City Schools’ funding and staffing for FM&O to Maryland and

urban schools and industry standards.

• City Schools’ specific parametric M&R cost forecast model, which uses regionally

adjusted industry standards, identifies an appropriate amount of funding and an adequate

36

level of staffing City Schools should provide for FM&O. The model also identifies

appropriate funding City Schools should expect to budget for Capital Renewal and to meet

the MOU requirements.

Parametric Model: A Guide to Determine Recommendations from Complex Conditions

The environment to accomplish the goals of the 21st Century Buildings Plan, capital improvement

projects and this CMP are complex and based on the study completed by Jacobs Engineering

developed for FM&O providing the parametric life-cycle maintenance cost estimates for 163

school facilities. The estimates predict life-cycle costs for PM and minor repair, unscheduled

maintenance, and renewal and replacement based on detailed building component lists. The data

used in the estimates include building component lists developed from four sample school types,

and a life cycle M&R forecasting software, MARS developed by Whitestone Research

Corporation.

Whitestone Research is an industry-leading provider of facilities-related cost analytics tools and

services. Whitestone provides statistical indices that accurately model, forecast, and benchmark

facilities costs for single assets and real estate portfolios. Whitestone also publishes operations and

M&R cost references for markets worldwide.

The MARS forecasting software uses the most current M&R cost data with a facilities cost

analytics tool, which forecasts operating and maintenance costs for every asset type and/or system.

The software generates accurate costs, taking into account local economic factors.

Advantages of the Parametric Model include:

• It is based on specific City Schools’ buildings and the City Schools’ inventory.

• It provides a way to separate estimated maintenance costs and capital costs. This is a

significant advantage to determine appropriate FM&O funding because total cost

requirements are funded by various sources; such as, general operating funds and capital

improvement funds.

• It offers a mechanism to analyze different funding scenarios.

• It can be used to analyze specific requirements and set priorities.

• It considers proposed life cycle, renovation and replacement schedules.

Disadvantages of the Parametric Model include:

• It does not consider all FM&O resources, only those determined to be direct to M&R needs;

consequently, the knowledge, skills and abilities of management and support staff are not

factored.

• It does not consider organizational and management methods. These are significant factors

that result in ineffective use of resources.

• It underestimates the deployment of Engineers in M&R and the strategy in this CMP is to

use Engineers in a greater capacity.

Please note that the figures in this section related to City Schools are estimated from the parametric

model, based upon industry standards. The numbers within the section are subject to change as

adjustments are made to the model.

37

Funding and Staffing Parameters

The table below provides a comparison of City Schools’ FY 2013 M&R funding to other schools,

various industry standards, and City Schools Parametric Model. It also shows that City Schools

budgeted $.79/square foot for M&R in FY 2013. Even with budget supplements that were required

to keep M&R funded through the end of the fiscal year, the final total $1.08 per square foot is

significantly less than City Schools’ peers and industry standards.

Table B1: Comparison of Current (FY 2013) City Schools M&R Funding to Maryland, Urban and

Industry Standards: This table displays M&R funding per square foot for a collection of two Maryland

Public Schools, one urban comparable, and three industry standards. Also shown are FY 2013 City Schools

and Parametric Model recommended funding levels for City Schools.

The sources of peers and industry standards displayed in this table include a City Schools

Parametric Model. The Parametric Model was developed from specific City Schools using a

commercial M&R cost forecasting software. Model results are based on total life cycle M&R costs

averaged over a 50-year service cycle. Being City Schools specific, the Parametric Model is the

basis for comparison to and analysis of City Schools’ M&R funding and staffing in this report.

The table below displays summary results for City Schools from the Parametric Model showing

M&R costs by category and school type.

External Sources M&R $/SF

Montgomery County School 2014 Budget 6.38$

Chicago Public Schools Program Management 5.44$

DOD Unified Facilities Criteria 3.73$

Whitestone Research Facility M&R Reference 3.05$

International Facility Management Association Benchmarks #32 2.49$

Frederick County Schools Maintenance Plan 2.17$

City Schools' M&R $/SF

Total Funding Currently 1.08$

Budgeted 0.79$

Additional Temporary Supplemental Funding 0.29$

Parametric Model Recommended Maintenance 2.33$

Parametric Model Recommended Capital Renewal 1.75$

38

Table B2: Parametric Model Forecasts for M&R: This table displays the 50-year average annual

forecasted total M&R requirement by school type. These numbers were derived from the City Schools

Parametric Model, discussed above, which does not include indirect costs, such as administration, office

supplies, office technology, maintenance of fleet, Grounds Shop, custodians and utilities.

Impacts of Current Funding

Table B3: Comparison of City Schools Parametric Model M&R Funding to Maryland, Urban and

Industry Standards This table displays Proposed M&R funding per square foot for a collection of two

Maryland Public Schools, one urban comparable, and three industry standards.

The 21st Century Buildings Plan, in total if fully executed, included $2.4 billion in 2012, per the

Jacobs report, to renovate and replace schools in the District. HB860 approved $1.1 billion in

financing in Phase 1 of this initiative. The funding strategy plan in this CMP is to provide resources

to FM&O to strategically protect the investment and improve M&R to all of the remaining schools

not covered by the $1.1 billion. By executing this program, the DM backlog will begin to decrease

over time and should eventually lead to the overall improvement to the conditions of schools will

be gradually improved. The program provides the added benefit of updating the facility portfolio

with new major building systems and components, reducing unscheduled maintenance and major

repair and renewal costs.

School Type

(MSDE Grade)#

Gross

Square

Feet

(GSF)

PM &

Minor

Repair

Unsched.

Maint.

Renew &

Replace

Total

M&R

$ Per

Square

Feet

Elementary (E/UC)53 3.7M $3.8M $2.9M $8.3M

$15.0

M$4.04

Middle (EM/M)74 6.6M $8.3M $5.1M $14.4M

$27.8

M$4.22

High (H/HM/EMH)36 7.8M $8.4M $5.5M $17.2M

$31.1

M$3.99

Total 163 18.1M $20.5M $13.5M $39.9M $73.9M $4.08

50 Year Average Annual M&R Cost Forecasts

Source M&R $/SF Montgomery County Schools 2014 Budget $6.38

Chicago Public Schools Program Management $5.44 Baltimore City Public Schools - Preventative Maintenance $1.13 Baltimore City Public Schools - Unscheduled Maintenance $0.75

Baltimore City Public Schools - Life Cycle Renew and Replace

$2.20

Baltimore City Public Schools M&R(total of above three) $4.08 DOD Unified Facilities Criteria $3.73

Whitestone Research Facility M&R Reference $3.05 International Facility Management Association Benchmarks #32 $2.49

Frederick County Schools Maintenance Plan $2.17

This constitutes the request of $15M to be allocated to FM&O from fiscal 2015 to 2019. See recommendations. Fiscal 2020 to 2024 much of the $12 M request can go toward life cycle renewal and replacement.

39

Staffing

Table B4: Staffing Directly Related to M&R: This is based on the parametric model.

The City Schools’ Parametric Model identifies a requirement of 226 in-house full time equivalent

staff to perform PM, minor repairs incidental to PM, and unscheduled maintenance.

Table B5: City Schools' In-House Parametric Model Labor Forecasts for M&R This table displays the

50-year average annual forecasted in-house FTE labor requirement by school type. These numbers were

derived from the parametric model, discussed above.

Discipline FTE Discipline FTE

Building Maintenance Worker I 8 Painter I 5

Building Maintenance Worker II 10 Painter II 1

Building Repairer 9 Pipefitter I 3

Carpenter I 1 Pipefitter II 2

Glazier 1 Plumber 1

Laborer 1 Sheet Metal Worker II 1

Locksmith 3 Storekeeper I 1

Maintenance Coordinator 1 Supervisor - Education Building 3

Mechanical Electrical 2 Supervisor - Stores 1

Office Assistant III 1 Welder 1

Manager - Contract Maintenance 1 Supervisor - Education Building 1

Manager - Maintenance Construction 2 Supervisor - School Project 6

Mechanic II - Electrical 2 Supervisor - School Project 1

Construction Mechanical Inspector 1

Building Maintenance Worker I 2

Building Maintenance Worker II 1

Stationary Boiler Maintenance Worker 0.2

Stationary Engineer - HP 0.25

Stationary Engineer I - Low Pressure 0.35

Stationary Engineer II - Low Pressure 0.05    

STAFF DIRECTLY RELATED TO M&R   Grand Total: 73.85

Current Staffing Chart (directly related to M&R)

Elementary 53 3.7M 23 23 46

Middle (EM/M) 74 6.6M 42 40 82

High (H/HM/EMH) 36 7.8M 49 49 98 Total 163 18.1M 114 112 226

#

FTEs: In- House

Unscheduled Maintenance

50 Year Average Annual FTE Forecasts

School Type (MSDE Grade)

Gross Square

Feet

FTEs: In- House

Preventive Maintenance

Total

40

APPENDIX C Mapped Regional Assignments

41

APPENDIX D Metrics

As stated in the MOU, the CMP shall contain specific metrics for the system-wide maintenance

and performance of all school buildings. City Schools shall measure and report to the STAT

Committee for inclusion in the STAT reporting program the progress toward attainment of the

following metrics. FM&O is to submit for IAC approval, an annual report of the accomplishment

of the metrics’ goals, objectives, and targets annually. City Schools will assess the metrics

annually, no later than June 30, and a report on the progress toward attainment of the metrics shall

be included in the CMP submitted to the IAC in accordance with COMAR 23.03.02.18. City

Schools’ annual maintenance budget shall include funds sufficient to achieve progress toward the

attainment of the metrics. Progress toward attainment of the metrics shall be a factor considered

by the IAC in the review of 10-Year Plan Projects for approval and the recommended approval of

future CIP projects, consistent with COMAR 23.03.02.03.B(1) and 23.03.02.03.B(2). The IAC

will assess progress toward attainment of metrics in the Annual Report submitted by the Parties.4

City Schools shall measure and report to the STAT Committee for inclusion in the STAT reporting

program the progress toward attainment of the following metrics:

1) Staffing parameters

2) Work Orders parameters

3) Inspections parameters

4) Implementation of a the CMMS

Domains are organized by the following:

Goals: Serve as the direction by which FM&O is to manage staff, resources and processes. Some

goals extend across domains and are appropriate as a guide for management. An example is the

domains for work orders and the CMMS.

Objectives: Serve as the activities and work by which FM&O will accomplish the related goals.

Fiscal 2018 Actual Data: Where available data was used in the development of Fiscal 2018

targets. PM activities will increase in FY 2019 because resources will be dedicated to these

activities, new processes will be implemented, physical plant assets will be inventoried, and the

CMMS implementation will continue. As these initiatives continue and data is captured in Fiscal

2018 there should be no impact to proposed finance allocations.

Fiscal 2018 Actual/Baseline: Data was and continues to be developed as objectives in process

and accomplished this year. Fiscal data has risen and fallen differently from past history due to the

continuation of three initiatives to improve the organization. The CMMS implementation requires

a redesign of many processes which affect work flows throughout the system. The inventory of

physical plant assets increased PM work orders and led to the additional deferred repairs to plant

and equipment and the expectations of staff to discover and log more repair requests.

4 Memorandum of Understanding for the Construction and Revitalization of Baltimore City Public Schools (MOU), Chapter 11

42

Fiscal 2018 Targets: These serve as an indicator of progress and accomplishment of the objective.

As noted above, the new initiatives will challenge FM&O to meet the targets.

Domains, Goals, Objectives and Metrics

Following are the goals, objectives and metrics by which FM&O progress is to be measured for

each domain.

1) Staffing Domain (SD): The goal of staffing is to fill vacant positions to lower the maintenance

burden across FM&O and to develop staffs’ technical and managerial expertise.

Goals:

• Hire qualified FM&O staff (Objective SD 1).

• Reduce the maintenance burden for each FM&O FTE (Objective SD 2).

• Implement training program (Objective SD 3).

• Plan evaluation metrics and system for fiscal 2018 (Objective SD 3).

Objective SD 1: Reduce the number of vacancies in FM&O by June 30, 2018.

SD 1 Reduce the number of vacancies in FM&O

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0730 - DIRECTOR FACILITIES 2 5 7 Director - Facilities Maintenance & Operations 1 1

Asst. Director - Building Maintenance & Operations 1 1

Asst. Director - Engineering & Mechanical Services 1 1

Energy Manager 1 1

Energy Specialist 1 1

Supervisor - Logistics 1 1

Table D1

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0752 - REPAIR REGION 8 34 42 Building Maintenance Worker I 1 15 16

Building Maintenance Worker II 3 7 10

Building Repairer reclassed to BMW I

Locksmith 1 2 3

Maintenance Coordinator 1 1

Painter I 3 3

Painter II 1 1

Pipefitter I 1 1

Pipefitter II 1 1 2

Plumber 1 0 1

Secretary 1 1

Storekeeper I 1 1

Supervisor - Stores 1 1

Welder 1 1

* Cost Center 0755 has positions that are Repair Region related

Table D2

43

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0753 - CONTRACT MAINTENANCE 1 8 9 Manager - Contract Building Maintenance 1 1

Manager - Facilities Construction Projects 0 0

Mechanic II - Electrical 2 2

Secretary 1 1

Supervisor - School Project 1 4 5

* Cost Center 0755 has positions that are CM related

Table D3

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/5/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0754 - MECHANICAL SERVICES 2 2 4 Assistant II - Accounting 1 1

Construction Mechanical Inspector 1 1

Manager 1 0 1

Supervisor - School Project 1 0 1

* Cost Center 0755 has positions that are Mechanical Services related

Table D4

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0784 - FACILITIES - ENGINEERING ( SE CLUSTER) 5 16 21 Executive Director 1 1

Manager-Engineering Operations 1 1

Driver I - Motor Vehicle 1 1

Office Assistant 2 2

Stationary Boiler Maintenance Worker 1 2 3

Stationary Engineer - HP 1 3 4

Stationary Engineer I - Low Pressure 2 3 5

Supervisor School Project 1 1

Technician II - HVAC 1 1 2

Technician III - HVAC 1 1

* Cost Center 0755 has positions that are Mechanical Services related

Table D5

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0749 - FACILITIES - GROUNDS 2 33 35 Manager - Grounds Shop 1 1

Supervisor - Grounds 2 2

Driver I - Motor Vehicle 5 5

Driver II - Motor Vehicle 1 1

Laborer 8 8

Lead I - Labor Crew 6 6

Lead II - Labor Crew 2 2

Mechanic I - Small Engine 1 1

Mechanic II - Small Engine 1 1

Office Assistant 2 2

Operator I - Vehicle Equipment 1 2 3

Operator II - Heavy Equipment 1 0 1

Storekeeper II 1 1

Trainer - Maintenance and Operations 1 1

** including Grounds FY 18 provide exterior PM and other services

Table D6

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0776 - FACILITIES - REGIONS REPAIR 1 4 5

Manager - Area Facilities 4 4

Building Maintenance Worker I 1 1

Table D7

44

Cost Center/Job Title: as of 7/2/2018 Vacant Filled Total 0755 - 21ST CENTURY PM 34 16 50 Administrative Assistant I 1 1

Analyst - Business 1 1

Assistant III - Accounting 1 1

Building Maintenance Worker I 3 2 5

Building Maintenance Worker II 2 2

Lead Technician - Facilities 4 6 10

Locksmith 1 1

Plumber 1 1 2

Stationary Boiler Maintenance Worker 16 16

Stationary Engineer II - Low Pressure 3 3

Supervisor - School Project 1 3 4

Technician II - HVAC 1 1 2

Technician II - Preventative Maintenance 2 2

* Additional 3M funding supports positions for Departments: 0752,0753,0754,0784

Table D8

Objective SD 2: The CMP, approved by the School Board on August 12, 2014, projected a square

footage per FTE of 86,885 by FY 2019. Due to the District’s budget shortfall in FY 2017, square

footage by FY 2019 is now projected to be 130,591 square feet. FM&O’s goal is 80,000 square

feet per FTE. To reach this goal FM&O would need 85 additional staff and a $5.2M annual budget

increase to support salary and benefits.

Metric SD 2:

*Assumes 17,629,740 sqft and 135 staff with captured daily labor transactions in CMMS

Portfolio review of the current and anticipated needs for charter/transformation schools that

request space from the district may pose possible challenges for Facilities that may cause difficulty

in achieving our proposed goals in the future. Facilities’ continues to push back on retaining

additional vacant buildings that are not to be used for swing space. However, current practice is to

use these vacant buildings for start-up operations with leasing agreements for new school space of

the space administered through our Real Estate Office. In most cases, however, the monthly lease

does not sufficiently compensate Facilities’ the true cost of the building’s operating budget. Our

intention is to push for the transfer of these vacant school buildings back to the City to lease directly

to the new school operators. This process would decrease overall square footage of inventory so

funds can be reallocated to currently operating schools buildings.

Objective SD 3: Implement training program and plan evaluation system for Fiscal 2018

implementation. To assist FM&O in 21st Century buildings coming online, the contract

130,591

80,000135

220

0

50

100

150

200

250

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

Current Sqft per FTE Goal Sqft per FTE

Nu

mb

er o

f E

mp

loy

ees

Sq

ua

re F

oo

tag

e

Square Footage Number of Employees

45

specifications will include a negotiated amount of training. This time will be utilized to provide

formal offsite training for mechanical or electrical systems or further additional training

opportunities. Examples of systems requiring formal training are the new automated building

monitoring system.

Metric SD 3:

SD 3 Implement Training program Plan evaluation metrics and system for FY 18

Staff Development FY 18

Training $10,000 $10,000

Accountability: Facility Stat Measures Added to Employee Evaluations Plan Provided

TABLE D9

2) Work Orders Domain: PM and repair work orders (RM) are the two sets of goals, objectives

and metrics for this domain.

Preventive Maintenance Goal Overview (PM): Counteract the reactive response by FM&O to

emergencies and repairs by increasing scheduled PM. It is important to note that as new and

renovated buildings become available, life-cycle equipment will require time to calibrate to

standard operation; therefore, work orders will increase for a period of time.

Goals:

• Reduce the number of unscheduled and emergency work orders leading to the reduction of

lost instructional time (Objective PM 4).

• Increase planned and scheduled PM (Objective PM 2).

• Establish PM baseline measures.

• Establish PM targets.

• Actual PM measures to meet or exceed FY 2018.

Objective PM 1: Establish staff whose primary work is PM. Elimination of positions prevented

hiring of these positions: request will be presented in FY 2018 budget plan.

Metrics PM 1: PM 1 Establish staff* whose primary work is preventive maintenance.

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

PM 1.1 Number of FTEs planned for preventive maintenance Input 0 2 18

PM 1.2 Number of FTESs actually performing preventive maintenance Output 0 2 18

PM 1.3 Percentage of FTEs performing preventive maintenance: Plan vs.

Actual Outcome 0 100% 100%

*FTE is one who spends 75% of their time on preventive maintenance tasks. Table D10

Objective PM 2: Effectively schedule time for PM activities.

46

Metrics PM 2: PM2 Effectively schedule time for preventative maintenance activities

Measure Name Category *FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

PM 2.1 Total number of preventive maintenance labor hours scheduled Input 1,154

PM 2.2 Total number of preventive maintenance actual labor hours Input 10,969

PM 2.3 Percentage of actual preventive maintenance labor hours scheduled Outcome 11% 100%

*FY17 was first year of implementation of SchoolDude and PM module was not yet implemented

Table D11

Objective PM 3: Plan and direct contractor resources to PM activities.

Metrics PM 3: PM3 Plan and direct contractor resources to preventative maintenance activities

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

PM 3.1 Total contractor costs for preventative maintenance Input $6,970,892 $15,004,053

PM 3.2 Total number of open emergency and repair orders Input 2,332 4,192

PM 3.3 Percentage of open emergency and repair orders Outcome -- 6% 0%

Table D12

Objective PM 4: Decrease the number of unscheduled and emergency work orders. Emergency

work orders are for immediate repair to equipment or the physical plant that is a threat to life and

safety or the mitigation of the threat to life and safety.

Metrics PM 4: PM4 Decrease the number of unscheduled and emergency wok orders

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY 18

Actual

FY19

Target

PM4.1 Total number of work orders completed Output 57,895 52,752

PM4.2 Total number of unscheduled work orders completed Output 41,891* 31,712

PM4.3 Percentage of unscheduled work orders completed Outcome 92.2% 88% 95%

*In FY16 and FY17 the new CMMS, SchoolDude, was purchased and work orders that had not been verified as closed at time of

implementation were rolled over and then verified. Also, it was the first time that work orders could be created and closed

immediately while onsite.

Table D13

Repair Work Orders Goal Overview (RM): Efficient and timely response to school physical

plant repairs, emergencies and vandalism. Efficient responses are measured by the time to

complete a work order. Timely responses are measured from the time a work order is submitted to

the time it is completed.

Goals:

• Efficient response to emergencies and repairs (Objective RM 1).

• Timely response to emergencies and repairs (Objective RM 2).

47

• Establish emergency and repair work order baseline measures in FY 2019.

• Establish emergency and repair work order completion targets for FY 2019.

• Actual emergency and repair measures to meet or exceed FY 2018 targets.

Objective RM 1: Improve the average hours to complete an emergency and repair work orders.

Metrics RM 1: RM 1 Improve the average hours to complete an emergency and repair work orders.

Measure Name Category FY17 Actual FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

RM 1.1 Total number of completed emergency and repair orders Input 41,891 31,712

RM 1.2 Total number of labor hours to complete emergency and

repair orders Output 95,517 53,382

RM 1.3 Average hours to complete emergency and repair work orders Outcome 2.0 1.6 1.5

Table D14

Objective RM 2: Improve response time to complete emergency and repair work orders.

Metrics RM 2: RM 2 Improve response time to complete emergency and repair work orders.

Measure Name Category FY17 Actual FY18 Actual FY19+

Target

RM 2.1 Total number of completed emergency and repair orders Input 41,891 31,712

RM 2.2 Total number of emergency and repair orders completed in 15

days or less Output 31,153 23,000

RM 2.3 Total number of emergency and repair orders completed in

greater than 15 days and less than 30 days Output 3,990 2,083

RM 2.4 Total number of emergency and repair orders completed in 30

days or less Output 35,143 25,053

RM 2.5 Percentage of emergency and repair orders completed in 15

days or less Outcome 74.4% 72.5% 90%

RM 2.6 Percentage of emergency and repair orders completed in

greater than 15 days and less than 30 days Outcome 9.5% 6.6% 5%

RM 2.7 Percentage of emergency and repair orders completed in 30

days or less Outcome 84% 79.1% 90%

Table D15

Objective RM 3: Reduce the percentage of open emergency and repair work orders.

Metrics RM 3: RM3 Reduce the percentage of open emergency and repair work orders

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

RM 3.1 Total number of open and completed emergency and repair orders Input 45,436 31,712

RM 3.2 Total number of open emergency and repair orders Input 3,545 4,192

RM 3.3 Percentage of open emergency and repair orders Outcome 97.7% 11.7% 5%

Table D16

Objective RM 4: Reduce the average age in days of open emergency and repair work orders.

48

Metrics RM 4: RM4 Reduce the average days of open emergency and repair work orders

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

RM 4.1 Total number of open and completed emergency and

repair orders Input 45,436 31,712

RM 4.2 Total age in days of open emergency and repair orders Input 298,093 463,073

RM 4.3 Average age in days of open emergency and repair

orders Outcome 105.4 110

Table D17

3) Inspections Domain (ID): Inspect critical assets in order to maintain life safety equipment and

protect physical plant assets.

Goal: Complete City, State and Federal mandated inspections.

Objective ID 4: Complete City, State and Federal mandated inspections. During FY 2018, an

additional $3 million dollars was provided to perform further preventive M&R. Fire alarm

inspections are one of many PM efforts. Inspections and testing were attempted during the school

year with occupied buildings however found to be difficult as the testing disrupted classroom

teaching. Determination was made that first testing would be on Fire Department noted violation

and requirements. Testing would be scheduled with a vendor after school hours and on Saturdays.

Metrics ID 4:

Table D18

4) Computerized Maintenance Management System Domain (CMMS): The goal is a fully

integrated enterprise solution that utilizes automated work flows to streamline all aspects of the

work order, PM, asset management, inventory management, utilities management and

community/facility management modules.

Goals:

• Implement a CMMS in school buildings replaced or renovated with the 21st Century

Buildings Plan financing and in school buildings that are not renovated with this financing.

IM 1 Maintenance Category Mandate Sites Size Unit Contractor Costs Responsible Target Period

ID 1.1 Roofs 165 177 9,167,380 square feet 405,000 $ Bill Nelson 2 Year ID 1.2 Sprinklers/Pumps 108 108 108 each 171,000 $ Brian Webster 2 Year ID 1.3 Elevators 136 130 172 each 412,000 $ Christine Bradshaw 1 Month ID 1.4 Elevators 136 130 172 each Christine Bradshaw 1 Year ID 1.5 Bleachers 30 30 90 sections 25,000 $ Mike Rozier 2 Year ID 1.6 Hood Suppression 138 118 118 each 54,000 $ Christine Bradshaw 2 Year ID 1.7 Operable Walls 38 38 38 each Not funded Erik Knight 1 Year ID 1.8 Fire Alarms 165 167 each 174,000 $ Terry Knight 2 Year

ID 1.10 Boilers 320 93 286 each William Evans 2 Year ID 1.11 Cooling Equipment 105 105 each ID 1.12 Generators 165 81 82 each

$ Erik Knight

2 Year ID 1.13 Emergency Lights 165

11 165 each Matt Difonzo 2 Year

Electrical Systems

Complete City, State and Federal mandated inspections

Jeff Wilson

256,000

65,630 $

ID 1.9 Cleaning Inspections Cleaning Not Captured under SchoolDude Data

1 Year

165 Not funded

$ 88,000

Matt Difonzo

49

The implementation will be rolling over a period of time as building maintenance plans are

developed and physical plant assets are identified for PM schedules (Objective CMMS 2).

• Reduce the number of unscheduled and emergency work orders leading to the reduction of

loss instructional time (Objective CMMS 1).

• Increase planned and scheduled PM (CMMS 1).

• Create a DM backlog (Objective CMMS 3).

• Establish PM baseline measures.

• Establish PM targets.

CMMS was obtained at the end of FY 2016 and implementation of data and inventory continued

in FY 2019.

Objective CMMS 1: Plan, schedule and complete PM work orders.

Metrics CMMS 1: Data will become available as the CMMS is implemented for all school

buildings in the portfolio. The system will allow for a more formalized schedule of maintenance

activities and result in a more aggressive and proactive program.

CMMS 1 Plan, schedule and complete preventive maintenance work orders.

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

CMMS 1.1 Total number of preventive maintenance work orders

scheduled Input 16,072 21,939 100%

CMMS 1.2 Total number of scheduled preventive maintenance

work orders completed Output 16,004 21,040 100%

CMMS 1.3 Total number of preventive maintenance work orders

completed Output 16,004 21,040 100%

CMMS 1.4 Percentage of preventive maintenance work orders

scheduled Outcome 100% 100% 100%

CMMS 1.5 Percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance work

orders completed Outcome 96% 96% 100%

Table D19

Objective CMMS 2: Inventory of physical plant assets in buildings that will not commissioned

through the 21st Century Buildings Plan financing. As the CMMS system is implemented, the asset

inventory data will integrate into the CMMS at a rate of approximately 35 schools per year. This

four year process is in the third year and will continue until all schools are inventoried.

Metrics CMMS 2: Inventory of assets into the CMMS will be a rolling implementation through

FY 2020.

CMMS 2 Inventory of physical plant assets

Measure Name Category FY17

Actual

FY18

Target

FY19

Target

CMMS 2.1 Total number of major building assets planned to be

inventoried (systems x schools) Input 35 33 35

CMMS 2.2 Total number of actual major building systems to be

inventoried (systems x schools) Input 420 396 420

CMMS 2.3 Percentage of plan completed of major building

systems inventoried Outcome 25% 25% 25%

Table D20

50

Objective CMMS 3: Create a DM backlog for all schools where the CMMS is implemented.

Metrics CMMS 3: The CMMS will be a rolling implementation over a period to be determined

by the RFP process; therefore, data will develop over this schedule.

CMMS 3 Create a deferred maintenance backlog for all schools where CMMS is implemented

Measure Name Category

FY17

Actual

FY18

Actual

FY19

Target

CMMS 3.1 Total number of CMMS work orders identified as deferred

maintenance Input 396 218

CMMS 3.2 Total physical plant value Input

CMMS 3.3 Percentage of scheduled preventive maintenance work orders

completed Outcome 96% 96% 100%

Table D21

APPENDIX E Scheduled Maintenance

Preventive Maintenance

Baltimore City Public Schools’ PM program is designed to extend the life of facilities, building

systems, and equipment. It ensures that equipment and systems operate at optimum efficiency and

those potential problems are identified at an early stage before they become expensive emergencies

and disrupt the learning environment. Due to the number of building systems and equipment

involved, performance of PM involves participation by all chapters in the maintenance and

operating offices. The in-house efforts are supplemented by contractual services when it is either

more cost effective to do so or if in-house resources are not available. Sufficient staff and proper

funding are needed to ensure that equipment is properly maintained, PMs are fully provided, and

the regular operational needs in the district are being met.

The PM Program includes regular inspection tours conducted by maintenance personnel as an

important part of their daily routines. The tour is not only a health and safety inspection of the

building but ensures that the building can operate in a safe mode and all critical systems are

operational, but additionally allows the maintenance staff the opportunity to identify deficiencies

that require attention, but do not shut the building down or out of service. If major deficiencies are

identified maintenance personnel are on-site or dispatched to take immediate corrective action. As

more 21st century buildings come online and incorporate computerized monitoring and control

systems these functions can be monitored by remote access systems. Program development is

underway and will continue to build on future hiring of additional technicians to provide in-house

PM services. FM&O’s Contract Maintenance has and will continue to oversee the PM aspects of

the program. Mechanical Services and Engineering will provide inspections for the HVAC

mechanical systems.

51

• Air Handler Units

• Boilers

• Chillers

• Compressors

• Controls

• Filters & Belts

• Pumps

• Roof top units

• Unit ventilators

• Water heaters

Figure E1

Scheduled Building Tours - Daily building tours with an inspection focus will be conducted by

designated maintenance personnel from the Maintenance and Inspection team. Building tours and

inspections focus on health and safety, as well as ensuring that all of the building systems are fully

operational. These daily tours provide maintenance staff the opportunity to identify and document

52

deficiencies which require follow-up attention and scheduling for maintenance and/or repair. If

major deficiencies are identified; direct-hire staff or contractors are dispatched for immediate

corrective action.

Scheduled PM Work Order Process - The PM work order process has several steps, including

equipment inventory, PM scheduling, execution, quality assurance, and reporting. The PM process

is based on a detailed inventory of each piece of equipment in the building. The inventory of assets

is managed through the CMMS database, and each system or piece of equipment is identified with

a unique identification label or ʺGuide Numberʺ.

Preventive Maintenance Scheduling - Each equipment type, or Guide Number, has a specific

maintenance servicing frequency scheduled in the CMMS database. City Schools subscribes and

adheres to the Preventive Maintenance Standards and schema published by Reed Construction

Data RS Means Facilities Maintenance & Repair 2014 Cost Data. This industry-recognized source

addresses the cost of all aspects of maintaining City School facilities as well as the scope and

frequency for PM tasks on hundreds of work items.

Execution - Specific tours and PM tasks automatically generated by the CMMS for daily work

planning and contractor coordination. FM&Oʹs operation teams are dispatched daily, via ʺwork

orderʺ assignment, to locations requiring inspection and/or performance of specific PM tasks.

Quality Assurance – The Facility Directors and Managers are responsible for assuring the quality

and completeness of the PM work performed by direct hire and contracted trades. The

Director/Manager maintain quality program oversight and responsibility for random inspections.

He/she may also delegate daily oversight tasks to supervisors or lead mechanics.

Reporting - Routine reporting allows FM&O to track the frequency, volume, and completion

statistics for PM orders.

Work Orders - During FY 2018, specifically July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, Maintenance

received 57,843 Work Orders. As of June 30, 2018, 52,752 were completed and 5,091 were open.

The tables and figures that follow represent the Work Order statistics for FY 2018.

2018 Work Orders by Month

Month Completed Open Total Percent of Total

Jul 4,638 105 4,743 8%

Aug 5,710 223 5,933 10%

Sep 5,276 120 5,396 9%

Oct 5,788 190 5,978 10%

Nov 4,834 174 5,008 9%

Dec 3,806 181 3,987 7%

Jan 3,763 185 3,948 7%

Feb 4,614 478 5,092 9%

Mar 3,948 578 4,526 8%

Apr 3,785 947 4,732 8%

May 3,687 734 4,421 8%

Jun 2,903 1,176 4,079 7%

Grand Total 52,752 5,091 57,843 100%

Table E1

53

2018 Work Orders by Division

Department Completed Open Total Percent of Total

Design & Construction 2 2 4 0%

Engineering Services 18,597 591 19,188 33%

Food & Nutrition 1 16 17 0%

Grounds Shop 5,879 353 6,232 11%

Health & Safety 72 30 102 0%

Logistics Office 3 2 5 0%

Mechanical Services 2,726 120 2,846 5%

Paid by School 6 2 8 0%

Pest Control 113 14 127 0%

Real Estate Office 2 2 0%

Repair Regions 20,597 3,507 24,104 42%

(blank) 496 152 648 1%

Total 52,752 5,091 57,843 100%

Table E2

Contract Services

Division Complete

New

Request

Work In

Progress

On

Hold* Deferred*

Waiting

Funding* Total

Contract Maintenance 4,258 6 209 20 64 3 4,560

Mechanical Service 2,726 1 75 31 13 2,846

Total 6,984 7 284 51 77 3 7,406

Table E3 *On Hold – Use when waiting on management to determine if this project will be done now or moved to Deferred or Waiting Funding”.; *Deferred

– This status is usually non-emergency work/project requests that were not taken into consideration during budget planning and are unable to be

completed because funding was never identified and may not become available.; *Waiting Funding - This status is usually non-emergency work/project requests that were considered during budget planning, however funds are not currently available, but the work will be completed

when funds are replenished (usually July 1).

Figure E2

54

APPENDIX F Unscheduled Maintenance

Unscheduled maintenance includes repair activities that cannot be programmed or forecasted, such

as emergency repairs and corrections of breakdowns. These repairs are usually based on reports or

work requests received from principals, custodians or other building-based personnel.

Unscheduled maintenance falls into three primary subcategories.

Figure F1

Emergency Repairs—Emergency repairs are actions to correct unforeseen breakdowns or failures

of integral building systems or equipment. They include repairs related to safety and security,

electrical, plumbing, water and mechanical system failures.

Vandalism and Security Related Repairs—A vandalism and security related repair item is one that

requires the expenditure of labor and material to restore the item to its original condition after it

has been damaged by vandals. It does not generally include extensive modifications of facilities

for the purposes of improving building security.

Temporary Repairs to Prevent Vandalism—At times temporary repairs are needed to prevent

vandalism. One example would be that a board would be placed in the opening of a broken window

until the window can be ordered and replaced. During FY18, specifically July 1, 2017 through

June 30, 2018, the Maintenance section received 2,123 Emergency Work Orders.

55

Figure F2

APPENDIX G Deferred Maintenance

DM refers to M&R activities that were not preformed when they should have been or were

scheduled to be and which, therefore, are put off or delayed for a future period.

The following Table identifies a sampling of the current DM projects: WOID LOCATION DESCRIPTION

62653 0232 Thomas Jefferson Ramp door are beyond repairs they are deteriorating from the inside and have be

repair several times.

74467 0205 Woodhome the steps and sidewalk are cracked. tripping hazard

74707 0228 John Ruhrah elevator has frequent breakdowns; parts difficult to find; needs complete

renovation/upgrade

74709 0261 Lockerman-Bundy Elementary elevator has frequent breakdowns; parts difficult to find; needs complete

renovation/upgrade

78562 0411 Walbrook Building Install an isolation valve - 3"cold water main on 3rd floor utility room boys side.

82091 0247 Cross Country Sidewalk, toward mechanical room and steps leading to kitchen need to be replaced

because they were destroyed during snow removal by bobcat and both are a serious,

safety hazard.

90762 0207 Curtis Bay Sewer line from portable is running into the storm line and needs to be moved to

sanitary.

98675 0212 Garrett Heights A large section of Sanitary line needs to be replaced

108934 0080 West Baltimore Building Replace check valve on sump pump

112700 0413 West - Harbor City Building Lights in auditorium needs to be changed

112701 0178 Francis M. Wood Building Old type of light timer needs to be changed, it’s not working lights are being left on at

all times

And bulbs are burning out.

114298 0402 Northern Building Main water valves and 80 feet of pipe need to be replaced.

121255 0260 Frederick Elementary Lights in ground type are mash and needs to be replaced.

129372 0220 Morrell Park Replace compressors on ac-3

Table G1

56

APPENDIX H Action Plans

• City Schools has developed a detailed set of protocols that specify responsibilities and

standard operating procedures (SOPs) by classification.

• Another related and notable resource is City Schools’ building maintenance plans (BMPs),

which will be created for each school. The BMP describes the process and required resources

for performing inventories, estimating hours needed to perform PM and executing PM. As

implementation of the CMMS continues, City Schools is conducting inventories, populating

the CMMS with data, performing maintenance and analyzing the data input and output, to get

maximum usefulness of the new system. FM&O plans to maximize involvement maintenance

personnel with the design, construction, commissioning, warranty and turnover periods of all

21st century projects. This evolution will be tracked closely and documented in order to

quickly build institutional knowledge and enhance FM&O skill sets.

Plan to Raise Mechanical/Engineering Service Levels

Build out teams with Additional $12 million by 2023

(our budget needs to be held whole with the addition of 3M each year,

no budget cuts and positions filled)

• Staff Support and Contractual Support to support existing facilities

• Staff Support and Contractual Support to support 21st Century Facility

• In-House support with adjusted salaries to be competitive

• Positions (Plan for support this Fall)

• HVAC staffing

• HVAC controls upgrades

• HVAC controls installation

• Department organizational changes

• Shift in use of contractual supports

• Contractual Support (serves to supplement not replace salaries)

• Support 21st Century Facility PM – 2% of the CRV

APPENDIX I Energy

City Schools’ Energy Office (EO) focuses on energy conservation practices, natural resources

preservation and elimination of utility waste. The EO also promotes environmental education for

our students and faculty.

This focus saves money, helps the environment, and leads to student environmental literacy. It also

supports government regulations regarding energy management and natural resources

conservation and follows Maryland Environmental Literacy Standards. The EO seeks a safe

learning environment and the well-being of employees, teachers, students and the community.

57

City Schools spends approximately $20 to $30 million yearly on utilities (electric, natural gas,

heating oil #2, steam and water/sewer) to operate school facilities. Therefore, using energy wisely

and eliminating waste is essential. The cost fluctuates and reflects the changing energy market.

In June 2016, the School Board passed a Sustainability Policy with three regulations

(Sustainability; Energy, Water and Resource Conservation; and Green Cleaning).

Figure I1

The Energy Office works with multiple departments within and beyond City Schools on utility

conservation. Efforts include:

• Energy Procurement

• Education & Awareness

• Recycling & Reducing Waste

• Retrofits & New Construction

• Monitoring, Reporting and Support

Energy Procurement

• Electricity and natural gas – Since 2006, City Schools has been a member of the Baltimore

Regional Cooperative Purchasing Committee (BRCPC) with other surrounding

jurisdictions. BRCPC utilizes an innovative wholesale portfolio program to procure energy

and manage costs. The program has proven to be highly successful in delivering lower

costs on a consistent basis. City Schools is in compliance with the Maryland Renewable

Portfolio Requirements for renewable energy certificates (RECs).

• Renewable energy – In FY 2016, City Schools worked toward procuring offsite solar

energy. The contract is signed and solar electricity production started in December 2017

Electric, $14,324,358

Natural Gas, $3,042,609

Oil #2, $2,665,503

Steam, $561,775

Water & Sewer, $2,508,029

FY-17 Total Utility Cost-$23,102,273

some water cost missing

58

and will provide about 3.5% of City Schools’ total electricity consumption. It is anticipated

to save over $2 million over its 20-year term.

Education & Awareness

• Green, Healthy, Smart Challenge and Baltimore Energy Challenge grants – Grants of up

to $2,500 are available through Baltimore City’s Sustainability Office and the Baltimore

Energy Challenge for schools to use for student-led greening efforts. In the past seven

years, 139 school received at least one of these grants and participated in sustainable

practices to help the environment and educate youth. Total cost of these grants amounts to

$609,264. Since 2016, BEC also hired three City Schools’ high school students during

summer as paid interns to work on sustainability goals.

• Maryland Green Schools Award program – The Maryland Association of Environment and

Outdoor Education (MAEOE) makes these awards to schools that demonstrate green

practices. Currently, 33 of our schools have the award.

• Education and Resources – An on-line Energy Toolkit is available for staff, students and

building occupants.

Recycling & Reducing Waste

• Baltimore City Department of Public Works (DPW) – City Schools partners with DPW to

promote single stream recycling. DPW picks up recycling from each school at no cost to

City Schools. DPW worked with City Schools to receive a donation of recycling bins from

Keep America Beautiful and the Unilever Corporation.

• Professional development – staff has provided professional development and promoted an

on-line Recycling Toolkit.

• Recycling rate – in FY 2017, 49 % of schools participated in single stream recycling. City

Schools also recycles light bulbs and electronics. In 2017, City Schools purchased a “Bulb

Eater” machine which allows in-house bulb crushing/recycling and saves on bulb recycling

costs.

Retrofits and New Construction

• Smart Energy Savers Programs from local utility vendor – since 2009, City Schools is

taking advantage of different incentives available from Baltimore Gas and Electric

Company (BGE) for prescriptive lighting, variable frequency drives (VFD), and HVAC

chillers etc. for energy efficiency projects throughout school facilities.

• Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification – since 2014, all

major new school construction projects are designed to achieve at least LEED Silver rating

by the United States Green Building Council. Education specifications and design

standards include energy conservation requirements.

59

• Net Zero schools – Baltimore City Schools have received $5.1 million in extra funds from

the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) to enhance Graceland Park/O’Donnell

Heights Elementary/Middle. Over the course of a year, the building will produce as much

energy as it consumes (“net zero”). Construction is expected to begin in the summer of FY

2018.

Monitoring, Reporting and Supporting

• Utility Billing – Since 2017, City Schools is using SchoolDude Maintenance software’s

energy module to monitor and compile utility data for all schools and facilities. Staff

identified $214,665 in billing errors during FY 2017.

• Curtailment program – Over the past five years, City Schools has entered into agreements

to participate in Emergency Load Response Program (ELPR). This program enables City

Schools to receive revenue for reducing electricity consumption during peak summer hours

when electricity is most expensive. FM&O staff respond by turning off equipment and

lighting during each event. Fourteen schools are enrolled in this program and have earned

approximately $113,770 for participation.

Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) – City Schools is a member of CGCS and has established

Key Performance Indicators (KPI) on energy to benchmark and compare our overall utility cost

and consumption by each commodity.