Preserving Our School Facility Investments
- By John P. Rome Jr.
- 04/01/16
PHOTO © DONATAS1205
Typically, the marching orders for facility/maintenance
departments are spelled out in some form of a long-range strategic
action plan. These plans vary in terms of format and time frames, but
the process generally includes, but is not limited to, data review, needs
assessment, goal setting, objectives to measure progress, action step
formation, stakeholder committee/review, review by the local school
board, implementation and follow-up reporting. These long-range
plans serve as a blueprint to keep facility/maintenance department
staffs on track in the hectic world of facility management.
A major priority area of many long-range strategic action plans
for facility/maintenance departments is the maintenance and
upkeep of all district facilities. This is an area that facility/maintenance
departments across the nation regard as a source of pride.
We have all heard the old adage it is easy to construct a building,
the hard work is in maintaining/preserving it. Too often, school
districts across the nation utilize non-recurring funding sources,
such as bond issue referendums, to fund major construction
projects without establishing a plan for long-term maintenance or
a plan to fund said maintenance.
TWO TOOLS FOR PLANNING
There are specific planning tools utilized by the St. Charles Parish
(La.) Public Schools’ Departments of Physical Plant Services and
Maintenance that illustrate how school districts can ensure that the
objectives associated with this priority are achieved. The two planning
tools that I will be highlighting are the Long-Range Major Maintenance/Capital Improvements Five Year Outlay Plan (LRMM/CIP)
and the Major Building Component Obsolescence Plan (MBCOP).
OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM
Before a description and analysis of these two plans are
outlined, it is appropriate to provide information that will give a
perspective on the environment in which these plans operate. The
St. Charles Parish Public School system is located in St. Charles
Parish, La., which is a suburban parish located 20 miles west of
New Orleans and 60 miles south of Baton Rouge. The parish is
divided by the Mississippi River with about half of the 52,000
residents located in each area. Because of the river, the parish has a
strong petro-chemical and maritime industry presence.
The school system is fortunate to have a community that is very supportive
of public education. In addition, business and industry support
the school system in a myriad of ways. Approximately 93 percent of the
school-aged children in the parish attend public schools, which is somewhat
of a rarity for the metro New Orleans region of the state of Louisiana.
The St. Charles Parish Public School System demographic information
is as follows: 15 schools, six centers, and eight administrative
buildings; a building square footage of 2,161,880; 1,811 employees;
9,819 students; and a per-pupil expenditure of $14,476. The annual
budget for the Departments of Physical Plant Services and Maintenance
averages $35,915,329 per fiscal year (FYs 2014, 2015, and 2016
were used to compute this average). The school system is an “A”
rated school system by the Louisiana Department of Education.
HOW THE PLANS WORK
Now that the environment in which these plans operate under
has been identified, a description and analysis of the LRMM/CIP
and the MBCOP will follow.
The former plan, LRMM/CIP, is a database of all schools/facilities within the school district that illustrates the identified
major maintenance and capital improvements projects for schools/facilities. For each school/facility, the project name, area/location,
year budgeted and estimated costs are listed. The plan is based
on a five-fiscal-year cycle with the current fiscal year being the
first point on the continuum. The plan allows for any necessary
flexibility as continuous change exists in facility planning. The
identified projects on this list will have some movement along this
continuum based on several factors, which will be discussed and
outlined later in this article.
The latter plan, MBCOP, is a database of all major systems
within buildings at all facilities in the district. Major systems in
the database include roofing, flooring, HVAC, energy management
and lighting. While there are many more building components/systems that can be tracked, these are the ones considered by the
district in an effort to not get lost in the minutia of the available
data. (Each district should tailor their plans to include building
components/systems that they deem as critical data points.)
For each item, a construction/installation date is entered and
a life-cycle-based replacement date is entered. For many years,
all of the data was entered manually into a spreadsheet created
by district staff. Life-cycle-based replacement dates were gleaned
from warranty information, manufacturer life cycle projections
and past performance data. In addition, replacement costs were
attained from means, manufacturer/vendor quotes and previous
project data costs (which must be adjusted for inflation and market
conditions). Understandably, this was a laborious task that occupied
a large amount of time and human capital.
Currently, facility managers have additional tools at their disposal
to make endeavors like these more manageable and run more efficiently. Various education enterprise asset management vendors
now provide forecasting instruments that can do much of this work
for facility departments. One example of this type of forecasting
program is the School Dude Capital Forecast Direct module.
The forecasting programs available through various vendors typically
have built in formulas to determine life-cycle-based replacement
dates and to determine major component replacement costs. The
administrative staff in the St. Charles Parish Public School System’s
Departments of Physical Plant Services and Maintenance is beginning
the process to research and select a facility component-forecasting
program that will meet the needs of the departments. Most forecasting
programs allow for migration of previously compiled data that may
have already been created in a format such as Microsoft Excel. This will
allow for the conversion process to be less laborious and more efficient.
A yearly analysis of the MBCOP database helps identify major
system projects that need to be planned for as part of the LRMM/CIP (see accompanying tables for an excerpt of the two plans and
an example of the analysis leading to action). Table 1.1, below, is
an excerpt from the MBCOP that illustrates an example of major
system information entered for a school site within the district.
Highlighted in yellow is the HVAC system information for Buildings
B and C at Albert Cammon Middle School. Notice the lifecycle
expectancy for the system was projected to expire in 2015.
Table 1.2, below, is an excerpt from the LRMM/CIP that
illustrates an example of scheduled major maintenance/capital
improvements for the same school showcased in table 1.1. Highlighted
in yellow is the correlating budgeted HVAC replacement
for Buildings B and C at Albert Cammon Middle. These two tables
serve as an example of how the plans are coordinated.
However, in the world of facilities, it’s not always as simple as it appears.
The only constant that can be counted on is that there will always
be movement and change. There are many other factors that must be
considered, such as available funds, emergency projects, other critical
need projects, work order data, warranty issues, et cetera, et cetera.
While it is important to realize that this type of planning cannot
be conducted in a vacuum, creating and utilizing forecasting
tools and replacement plans enable school districts to be in a more
advantageous position regarding the preservation of facilities.
Having plans such as building component obsolescence plans and
long-range major maintenance plans will facilitate the protection
of the investment our districts and communities have made in the
facilities that house our most precious commodity — students.
Table 1.1 |
St. Charles Parish Public Schools Building Maintenance Obsolescence Planning Chart |
Albert Common Middle School |
|
Yr/Built |
Sq/Ft |
Asbestos |
Rep/ Budgeted Yr |
HVAC |
Roof |
Lighting |
Flooring |
EMS |
Building - A |
1973 |
36000 |
X |
Yr/Replaced |
2003 |
2006 |
1973 |
1973 |
X |
|
|
|
|
Yr/Budgeted |
2023 |
2026 |
2015 |
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building - B |
1993 |
14727 |
|
Yr/Replaced |
1993 |
1993 |
1993 |
1993 |
X |
|
|
|
|
Yr/Budgeted |
2015 |
2043 |
2015 |
2023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building - C |
1993 |
9871 |
|
Yr/Replaced |
1993 |
1993 |
1993 |
1993 |
X |
|
|
|
|
Yr/Budgeted |
2015 |
2043 |
2015 |
2023 |
|
Comments: Building A flooring abated as part of 2003 flooring replacement. |
Table 1.2 |
LONG RANGE MAJOR MAINTENANCE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - GOAL D 2014-19 |
School |
Project Name |
FY 2014-15 |
FY 2015-16 |
FY 2016-17 |
FY 2017-18 |
FY 2018-19 |
|
|
EST. |
EST. |
EST. |
EST. |
EST. |
|
|
BUDGET |
BUDGET |
BUDGET |
BUDGET |
BUDGET |
Allemands Elem. |
Main building and cafeteria roof (Complete) |
|
|
|
|
|
Allemands Elem. |
Site drainage |
|
|
|
$140,000 |
|
Allemands Elem. |
Intercom (Complete) |
$40,000 |
|
|
|
|
Allemands Elem. |
Building B Center classroom enclosures |
NFS |
$72,500 |
$72,500 |
|
|
Cammon Middle |
B/C Building HVAC |
|
|
|
|
|
Cammon Middle |
Parking lot addition (Complete) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cammon Middle |
Parking lot milling, asphalt, and striping (Complete) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cammon Middle |
Cooler/freezer |
$75,000 |
|
|
|
|
Cammon Middle |
Lighting fixture replacement |
$120,000 |
|
|
|
|
This article originally appeared in the issue of .