Central State University March 25 th, 2010

Transcription

1 Central State University March 25 th, 2010 oster Connecticut College Cornell University Dartmouth College Davidson College Drew University Drexel University Duke University Duquesne University East Stro niversity Northwestern University Nova Southeastern University Oregon Institute of Technology Oregon State University Pace university Pacific Lutheran University of Massachusetts Amherst University of Massachusetts Boston University of Massachusetts Dartmouth University of Massachusetts Lowell University of Michigan Unive

2 Sightlines profile Common vocabulary, consistent methodology, credibility through benchmarking 260+ member campuses 100+ public and 130+ private institutions Developed a useful tool based on: Common vocabulary Consistent analytical methodology Credibility through benchmarking 2

3 A vocabulary for measurement The Return on Physical Assets ROPA SM The annual investment needed to insure buildings will properly perform and reach their useful life Keep Up Costs The accumulated backlog of repair and modernization needs and the definition of resource capacity to correct them. Catch Up Costs The effectiveness of the facilities operating budget, staffing, supervision, and energy management The measure of service process, the maintenance quality of space and systems, and the customers opinion of service delivery Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Operating Effectiveness Service Asset Value Change Operations Success 3

4 Central State terms with Sightlines analysis The Return on Physical Assets ROPA SM Basic Renovations Planned Maintenance Gift Grants Bond funded projects Operating Budgets Staffing reports Utility Logs Work order production Campus Inspection Service Process Customer satisfaction survey Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Operating Effectiveness Service Asset Value Change Operations Success 4

5 Changes since the qualification 1. Adjusted building construction dates 2. Accounting for Dayton Campus in Density Factor 3. Adjusted developed & maintained acreage 4. Broke down Custodial & Maintenance staffing by person by building 5. Confirmed supervisory positions 6. Added infrastructure premium to the Water Department and Power Plant operating costs 7. Accounting for additional planned/preventative maintenance contracts 5

6 What s Included? 20 E&G facilities; 764,039 GSF FY09 Breakdown of Space Descriptive text goes here Excluded 32% State Supported (E&G) Included 68% Non State Suported (AUX) 6

7 Comparison Institutions Institutions Cheyney University of Pennsylvania Clarion University of Pennsylvania East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania Eastern Oregon University Edinboro University of Pennsylvania Fitchburg State College Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania Mansfield University of Pennsylvania Plymouth State University Shawnee State University Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Wright State University Location Cheyney, PA Clarion, PA East Stroudsburg, PA La Grande, OR Edinboro, PA Fitchburg, MA Lock Haven, PA Mansfield, PA Plymouth, NH Portsmouth, OH Slippery Rock, PA North Dartmouth, MA Dayton, OH 7

8 Core issues for Central State University I. Complexity and age of campus present additional capital & operational demands. II. Scarce availability of Keep Up dollars has left CSU with a significant Catch Up investment need. III. Effective daily operations given the campus s age and limited operating resources. IV. Strong service process lacking complementary work order system. 8

9 Comparing CSU age profile with peers Significant portion of campus rebuilt after tornado of % 70% CSU Renovation Age vs. Peers 77% 60% % of Campus GSF 50% 40% 30% 46% 20% 10% 0% 22% 19% 9% 9% 9% 5% 0 to to to % CSU Renovation Age Peer Renovation Age A major renovation is designated as a project within a building in which the total cost is over 50% of the total replacement value of the building and affects all major systems within the building. 9

10 Defining the annual investment need Significant portion of campus in Catch Up mode Age Category < 10 Years Age Category Years Age Category Over 25 Years $/GSF $60 $55 $50 $45 $40 $35 $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 9% 9% 82% Years Annual Life Cycle Cash Flow Amortization of Life Cycle Expenses 10

11 Technical complexity rating FY09: 3.3/5.0 Database Average: 2.99 Complexity often has a direct correlation with energy consumption, maintenance staffing, and replacement values a higher complexity often results in higher consumption, replacement costs, stewardship targets and increased operational demand. 11

12 Campus density factor FY09: 242 Users/100,000 GSF Database Average:

13 ASSET VALUE CHANGE

14 Total capital spending vs. peers Limited investment in existing space 5 Year average is $0.4/GSF less than peers. This equates to $336K annually. CENS II New Space Project spending with CENS II 14

15 Total capital spending vs. peers Limited investment in existing space 5 Year average is $3.2/GSF less than peers. This equates to $2.4M annually on existing space. CENS II New Space Project spending with CENS II 15

16 Stewardship Investment Target Defining attainable goals to manage the rate of deferral $7 FY2009 FY09 Replacement Value = $239.1M $6 $ in Millions $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $3.6 $2.9 Life cycle is discounted for the coordination of modernization and renovation. $1.3 $1.5 $0 Total Need Target Need $6.5M Life Cycle Model $2.8M Functional Obsolescence Envelope/Mech Space/Program Sightlines Recommendations 16

17 Stewardship need Setting goals to arrest the rate of asset deterioration $4.0 Annual Investment Target, and Actual Stewardship Expenditures $3.5 $3.0 $ in Millions $2.5 $2.0 $1.5 $1.0 $1.8M $1.4M $2.5M $0.5M $2.7M $0.5 $0.0 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 Envelope/Mech Annual Investment Target Space/Program Five year total deferral to target is $8.9M 17

18 Total stewardship spending vs. peers 18

19 Total capital spending vs. peers Mold project skews spending profile CSU 5 Year Spending Mix 12% 43% 12% 11% 22% Peer 5 Year Spending Mix 7% 13% 28% 32% 20% Envelope Infrastructure Code Systems Space Project spending drops to 50 /GSF when mold remediation is removed. 19

20 The estimated backlog of need Total Dollars (Millions) $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 $108.6 Central State Backlog Estimates $76.3 $55.4 CSU Campus Priority Needs $26.3 IFP Backlog Estimation Deferral to Equilibrium Ohio State System Number Internal Priority Backlog Sightlines suggested backlog estimate of CSU s State Supported Space is $76.3M 20

21 OPERATIONS SUCCESS

22 Facilities operating budget Consistently operating with a lower budget than peers You are currently spending $1.60/GSF less than peers or $1.2M annually 22

23 Breaking down the facilities operating budget Daily Service $1.18/GSF or $0.9M annually 23

24 Energy cost Regional Peers Cincinnati State Technical &CC College of Wooster Columbus State CC Lorain County CC Owens State CC The University of Dayton University of Akron University of Cincinnati Xavier University Energy Rate Cost Avoidance = $290K in FY09 24

25 Energy consumption Fossil driving consumption increases In FY07 CSU rented a summer A/C unit and lost deregulated discount. 25

26 Maintenance operations Coverage ratio reflected in inspection score +2.5 FTEs Impression/General Repair Score Central State Peers Database Avg

27 Custodial operations Keeping pace despite limited resources +5.5 FTEs Cleanliness Score Central State Peers Database Avg

28 Grounds operations Coverage levels in line Grounds Score Central State Peers Database Avg

29 Service process Current work order system impacting score Service Process Index (%) The composite score of Sightlines Service Process analysis which includes an evaluation of the service department reporting structure, scheduling process, work order system capacity, and reporting capabilities. Opportunities for improvement Implement work order system with additional capabilities Utilize these additional tracking/reporting capabilities Communicate schedules/changes in schedules to customers Solicit feedback from customers 29

30 Concluding comments The impact of an aging, complex campus: CSU s campus is significantly older than its peers with the majority of space falling in the yr age category and is also one of the more technically complex. This drives operational needs and has created a large Catch Up need. Limited capital spending: With the new construction of CENS I and CENS II the investment into existing facilities has been minimal. Several large infusions of capital are imperative in order to renovate older facilities and aggressively attack the backlog. Defining the backlog: Determining an accurate view of the backlog of need on campus, enables the campus to prioritize future and much needed Catch Up investments. Effective, yet strained operations: Given the lean resources and high backlog operations have done a commendable job. While renewing the older facilities should be given the highest priority, stay aware of the shortfall in the operating staff. Additional resources will be required to keep pace with the changing campus. The value of service: In order for a planned maintenance program to gain traction and a capital investment program to get fed the right projects to release operating costs, a better work order system is needed. Implementation of the customer satisfaction survey will provide additional perspective on the service axis and offer other opportunities for improvement. 30

31 GLOSSARY AND COMMENTS

32 Sightlines ROPA SM benchmarking definitions Age profile terminology Age Categories Less than 10 Years the honeymoon period of a building in which very few life cycles are Descriptive due. Requires text goes little to here no investment and minimal operational effort Years a time period in which small components within a building begin to reach the end of their useful lives. Require more time and investment than buildings under 10 years old, but still operate as a new building Years Post World War II buildings. These buildings were generally not built with the same quality as those prior to or after this time period. Therefore, these buildings and their components often reach the end of their useful life more quickly, and place a great strain on facilities staff. Over 50 Years a time period in which most major components of a building reach the end of their useful lives. Require a significant amount of investment and operational effort. These buildings are often completely renovated to restore them to a working condition that is consistent with today s standards. 32

33 Sightlines ROPA SM benchmarking definitions Asset Value Change terminology Annual Stewardship Total Annual Stewardship (% of target) The sum of all recurring capital funding and planned or preventative maintenance expressed as a percent of the institution s individualized annual Descriptive text goes here investment target defined by Sightlines. If total annual stewardship as a % of target is low, the campus deferral rate will be correspondingly high. Stewardship Funding by Type (% of target) The sum of all recurring capital funding and planned/preventative maintenance expressed as a percent of the institution s individualized annual investment target defined by Sightlines, broken out between percent of envelope/mechanical target funding and percent of space/programming target funded. Asset Reinvestment Asset Reinvestment Backlog ($/GSF) The accumulated maintenance/repair, modernization and infrastructure needs on campus. The Asset Reinvestment Backlog is the sum of the annual investment requirements that the institution has not kept up with or has not addressed with onetime capital. Total Project Spending ($/GSF) The sum of all Annual Stewardship and Asset Reinvestment funds spent annually renovation, planned maintenance or improvement projects. The total project spending is broken out by project package (building envelope, building systems, infrastructure, space, and code) and does not include new construction or non facilities expenditures such as technology related projects, feasibility or design studies, academic equipment, etc. 33

34 Sightlines ROPA SM benchmarking definitions Operating budget terminology Facilities Operating Budget Total ($/GSF) The Facilities Operating Budget Total benchmark analyzes the amount budgeted each year to operate campus physical assets and the department Descriptive that maintains text goes them. here The budget is broken into three different categories: o Daily Service: Materials, labor costs, service contracts, office expense, etc. associated with the regular maintenance, cleaning and grounds keeping of the campus. o Planned Maintenance: Materials, labor costs, service contracts, etc. that enhance or extend the useful life of campus buildings and components. Some examples include changing belts and filters on HVAC equipment, elevator service contracts, sprinkler and fire alarm system testing/maintenance contracts, etc. o Utilities: The procurement of utility commodities, i.e. natural gas, oil, steam, electricity, water/sewer, etc. NOTE Utilities costs do not include institutionally held people costs, plant operations or service contracts of utility systems. 34

35 Sightlines ROPA SM benchmarking definitions Staffing terminology Staffing (GSF/FTE) The coverage ratio for staff, or the amount of space that each employee is responsible for covering. Utility workers, event set up, planned maintenance, construction Descriptive crews and text sold goes services hereare removed so as to only include full time equivalents performing daily service or annual stewardship in buildings. Supervision (FTE/Supervisor) The number of full time equivalents that report to each supervisor, or the number of staff for which each supervisor is responsible. Supervisors are defined as those that have direct line authority and can direct other workers. In some cases Sightlines treats individuals as partial supervisors to account for working foremen or lead tradesmen; a portion of their time will be captured as supervising and part will be captured as working. A high benchmark indicates lower levels of supervision, often resulting in less productivity or effectiveness within the department. Materials ($/FTE) The trades supplies used by each full time equivalent, or the amount of money that each maintenance worker has to do his/her job. This benchmark is directly influenced by Staffing. If the GSF/FTE is far above or below the average, the $/FTE may appear skewed, even if the total material dollars is appropriate for the campus. 35

36 Sightlines ROPA SM benchmarking definitions Campus inspection terminology Campus Inspection An independent judgment of campus appearance gained by an inspection of a representative sample of campus buildings and grounds. The inspection rates the following Descriptive categories text on goes a scale here of 1 5: ocleanliness An independent judgment of campus cleanliness gained by an inspection of a representative sample of campus buildings. Space is inspected to determine if it is free from dirt, debris, and stocked with the proper paper products in restrooms, etc. ogeneral Repair/Impression An independent judgment of campus general repair/impression gained by an inspection of a representative sample of campus buildings. Space is inspected to. oexterior Inspection An inspection to evaluate the condition of building envelopes/exteriors. This inspection includes exterior doorways, siding, pointing, roofs, windows, etc. ogrounds Inspection An evaluation of grounds appearance including plantings, turf, fixtures, roadways, and walkways. omechanical Spaces Inspection An evaluation of mechanical spaces within campus buildings. The inspection rates the general appearance of mechanical spaces, including cleanliness, labeling of pipes, lighting, drainage, appearance of equipment, etc. 36

37 QUESTIONS?