exploring the state of facilities - your chance to "ask sightlines"
DESCRIPTION
How does a campus turn back the clock on their facilities? How do we address growing backlog needs with limited or shrinking funds? What energy projects can reduce consumption and boost our bottom-line? These are a few of the questions answered by Sightlines experts in this informative and engaging webinar as we offer an in-depth discussion of the benchmarks, trends, and best practices introduced in our 2014 report The State of Facilities in Higher Education. Additionally, this interactive presentation: - Explores the analysis that serves as the basis for our industry-leading database and the report it informs - Shows data that goes beyond the broad trends - Offers strategies for success and case studies showing innovative solutions to common facilities challengesTRANSCRIPT
University of Mississippi Medical Center
University of Missouri – ColumbiaUniversity of Missouri – Kansas CityUniversity of Missouri – St. LouisUniversity of Nebraska at KearneyUniversity of Nebraska at LincolnUniversity of Nebraska Medical CenterUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of New HampshireUniversity of New HavenUniversity of North TexasUniversity of Northern IowaUniversity of Notre DameUniversity of OregonUniversity of PennsylvaniaUniversity of RedlandsUniversity of Rhode IslandUniversity of RochesterUniversity of San DiegoUniversity of San FranciscoUniversity of Southern MaineUniversity of Southern MississippiUniversity of St. ThomasUniversity of Tennessee, KnoxvilleUniversity of Texas at DallasUniversity of the PacificUniversity of the Sciences in
PhiladelphiaUniversity of ToledoUniversity of VermontVanderbilt UniversityVassar CollegeVirginia Commonwealth UniversityVirginia Department of General
ServicesVirginia State UniversityWagner CollegeWake Forest UniversityWashburn UniversityWashington University in St. LouisWellesley CollegeWesleyan UniversityWest Chester UniversityWest Liberty UniversityWest Virginia Institute of Technology
Exploring the State of FacilitiesYour Chance to “Ask Sightlines”
State of Facilities in Higher Education:2014 Benchmarks, Best Practices & Trends
Your Presenters
Jim KadamusVice [email protected]
Jim KadamusVice [email protected]
Jay PearlmanAssociate Vice [email protected]
Jay PearlmanAssociate Vice [email protected]
Today’s Agenda
Introduction
Facilities Trends
“Ask Sightlines”
Strategies & Conclusion
Still time to “Ask Sightlines”Enter questions in the box
Enter questions here at any point during the webinar
Please take our satisfaction survey at the end of the presentation.
Where Does Our Data Originate?Robust membership includes colleges, universities, consortiums and state systems
Serving the Nation’s Leading Institutions:
• 19 of the Top 25 Colleges*• 17 of the Top 25 Universities*• 42 Flagship State Universities• 12 of the 14 Big 10 Institutions• 8 of the 12 Ivy Plus Institutions• 8 of 13 Selective Liberal Arts Colleges
* U.S. News 2014 Rankings
Sightlines is proud to announce that:
• 450 colleges, universities and K-12 institutions are Sightlines clients including over 340 ROPA members.
• 93% of ROPA members renewed in 2013
• We have clients in 43 states, the District of Columbia and Canada
• 100 new members since 2013
Sightlines advises state systems in:
• Alaska• California• Connecticut• Hawaii• Maine• Massachusetts• Minnesota• Mississippi• Missouri• New Hampshire• New Jersey• New York: CUNY and
SUNY• Oregon• Pennsylvania• Texas• West Virginia
ROPA+: The Foundation of a Database
Process tells the campus story of historical trends, forecasts future needs, and tracks performance
QVQ (Quantify, Verify, Qualify) process allows apples-to-apples comparisons
5 years of data collected on site and updated annually
Three phases provide a 360 degree view of campus
“The State of Facilities in Higher Education”Sightlines annual publication on broad industry trends
Visit our website at Sightlines.com to download
your free copy
Introduction
“One side effect of this rapid growth has been the creation of an increasingly large obligation for the future renewal and replacement of the physical plant.”
Rick Biedenwig – 1980Founder, Pacific Partners Consulting Group
An Accurate Prediction
Campuses Face Broad Challenges
An overall decline in the number of high school graduates
Broad Challenges
Resources on most campuses remain constrained and outside support is steady, at best
Campuses Face Broad Challenges
Broad Challenges
Capital and operating investments for campus facilities have fallen and remain below FY 2009 levels, in terms of real dollars
Campuses Face Broad Challenges
Broad Challenges
Capital needs for facilities continue
Spaces built in the 1950s-1960s need renewalComplex buildings constructed since 1995 require keep up
Campuses Face Broad Challenges
Broad Challenges
Changing the Conversation in Facilities Management
Space, Density & Age
Campus Space and EnrollmentNational average for enrollment and space growth
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
hang
e of
Enr
ollm
ent &
Spa
ce
Space & Enrollment GrowthNational Average
National Space Growth National Enrollment Growth
Campus Space and EnrollmentBy institution type
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
hang
e of
Enr
ollm
ent a
nd S
pace
Space & Enrollment GrowthBy institution type
Space Growth Enrollment Growth
Comprehensive Research Small
Campus Space and EnrollmentPublic vs. Private Institutions
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Perc
ent C
hang
e of
Enr
ollm
ent &
Spa
ce
Campus EnrollmentBy Public vs. Private
Space Growth Enrollment Growth
Public Private
The Aging CampusNational Trending vs. Public and Private
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% o
f Spa
ce
Square Footage by Age Category (Renovation Age)Public vs. Private
Under 10 10 to 25 25 to 50 Over 50
National Average Public Average Private Average
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
% o
f Tot
al G
SF C
onst
ruct
ed
Constructed Space Since 1880
Waves of Construction Hitting Major Life CyclesPercent of total database GSF
Pre-War Post-War Modern Complex
*FY15 includes projections of new space online FY14-15
40% 27%
Pre-
War Built before 1951
Durable constructionOlder but typically lasts longer Po
st-W
ar
Built between 1951 and 1975Lower-quality constructionAlready needing more repairs and renovations M
oder
n Built between 1975 and 1990Quick-flash constructionLow-quality building components
Com
plex
Built in 1991 and newerTechnically complex spacesHigher-quality, more expensive to maintain & repair
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Constructed New Space
Academic Non-Academic
Academic vs. Non-Academic
Historic Look at Constructed Space on Campus
*FY15 includes projections of new space online FY14-15
“Ask Sightlines”Response
At Risk Age Profiles TrendNational Trending vs. Public and Private
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% o
f Spa
ce
Square Footage by Age Category (Renovation Age)Public vs. Private
Under 10 10 to 25 25 to 50 Over 50
National Average Public Average Private Average
24
Institutions Can Get YoungerState system reverses the trend
Peers System A
Capital Investment
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/ G
SF
Capital Investment into Existing SpacePublic vs. Private
Annual Institutional Capital One-Time Capital Average
Annual institutional capital
Public Private
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/ G
SF
Capital Investment into Existing SpacePublic vs. Private
Annual Institutional Capital One-Time Capital Average
Annual institutional capital
Public Private
20% increase
52% increase
Facilities Backlogs Continue to RiseNational Average
$79 $81 $82 $85 $87 $90 $92
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
$-
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
$100
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/G
SF
Backlog $/GSF
Backlog/GSF Percentage Change of Backlog
Facilities Backlogs Continue to RisePublic vs. Private
$83 $86 $88 $90 $93 $96 $99
$74 $74 $76 $78 $81 $82 $85
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
$-
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/G
SF
Backlog $/GSFPublic vs. Private
Backlog/GSF Percentage Change of Backlog
Public Private
“Ask Sightlines”Response
Understanding the Next 10 Years
$230
$-
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 Year Need
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
$107
$23
$100
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 Year Need
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
Backlog & Renewal NeedBacklogBacklog
Remaining Backlog Need (years 4 – 6)
Critical Deferred Maintenance (years 1 – 3)
Renewal Need (Lifecycle needs coming due between 2014-2023)
An Execution Strategy for 10 Years
$230
$-
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Asset Reinvestment
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
$107
$23
$100
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 Year Need
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
Backlog & Renewal Need
Requires additional data above the current Discovery process
32
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
10 Year Breakout of NeedBacklogBacklog
10-Year Needs vs. Investment Capacity
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
10 Year Total Capital Need by Year
$107 $120
$23
$100
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 YearNeed
ProjectedInvestmentCapacity
Tota
l Dol
lars
(Mill
ions
)
10 Year Total Capital Need & Capacity
Operations Effectiveness
Operating Budgets See Little GrowthNational operating budget average
$4.2 $4.3 $4.4 $4.4 $4.5 $4.5 $4.6
$0.3 $0.3 $0.3 $0.3 $0.3 $0.3 $0.3
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$3.0
$4.0
$5.0
$6.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/G
SF
Facilities Operating BudgetNational Average
Daily Service Planned Maintenance
$4.16 $4.30 $4.49 $4.38 $4.52 $4.45 $4.59$4.15 $4.32 $4.39 $4.40 $4.42 $4.50 $4.55
$0.22$0.23
$0.24 $0.25$0.27 $0.29
$0.29
$0.31$0.32 $0.35 $0.35 $0.35 $0.36 $0.37
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
$/G
SF
Daily Service Planned Maintenance
$5.22 $5.33
Budgets Not Keeping Up With InflationOperating budgets averages
Public Private
Maintenance Coverage Rates Continue to IncreaseTrend continues across public, private and nationwide
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Tota
l GSF
/FTE
Maintenance CoverageGSF per FTE
National Average Public Average Private Average
Custodial Staffing is also IncreasingSeen on public, private and nationwide levels
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Tota
l GSF
/FTE
Custodial CoverageGSF per FTE
National Average Public Average Private Average
Energy Use
Significant Reductions in Normalized ConsumptionNational average for energy consumption
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
hang
e Si
nce
2007
BTU
/GSF
Normalized Energy ConsumptionNational Average
Fossil Consumption Electric Consumption Percent Change of Total Consumption
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
% C
hang
e Si
nce
2007
MM
BTU
Average Total Energy UseNational Average
Fossil Consumption Electric Consumption Percent Change of Total Consumption
Average Energy Use Flat Since FY07Finding efficiencies in existing space to balance new construction
Use of Natural Gas Continues to GrowMajor change in short timeframe
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Campus Fuel MixNational Average
Natural Gas Other Fuel Types
-14%
-12%
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
MTC
DE/
Stud
ent F
TE
Avg. Utility Emissions per Student FTENational Average
Utility GHG per StudentPercent Change since 2007
Normalized Utility Emissions FallingBoth normalized metrics falling at similar rates
-14%
-12%
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
MTC
DE/
1,00
0 G
SF
Avg. Utility Emissions per 1,000 GSFNational Average
Utility GHG per 1,000 GSFPercent Change since 2007
“Ask Sightlines”Response
Low Energy Consumption Keeps DroppingIncrease in PM supports lower energy consumption
Regional Peer Avg.
Regional Peer Avg.
Within the top 10% of lowest consuming institutions in
Sightlines’ database
46
Increasing Focus on Systems, Envelope, & Infrastructure
Five year average investment: $2.97/GSF
11%
10%
20%
35%
24%
Project Spending Mix
Building Systems Envelope Infrastructure Space Renewal Safety/Code
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
$/G
SF
Project Spending $/GSF
47
Increasing Focus on Systems, Envelope, & Infrastructure
Five year average investment: $2.97/GSF
11%
10%
20%
35%
24%
Project Spending Mix
Building Systems Envelope Infrastructure Space Renewal Safety/Code
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
$/G
SF
Project Spending $/GSF
Leaner Operating Expenses
-
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
$ / G
SF
Total Operating Actuals
Peers
48
Total Avg. $6.12Total Avg. $5.61
Sample
$0
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
$6
$/G
SF
Daily Service
Daily Service Below Peer AverageOperating with fewer daily service resources; trending down
Institutions ordered by tech rating
Daily Service Over Time
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
$1.6
$1.8
$ / G
SF
Planned Maintenance
Planned MaintenanceIncreased PM efforts has improved in-house PM performance
Institutions ordered by tech rating
$0.13$0.26 $0.27
$0.12
$0.31 $0.29
2011 2012 2013
Sample PM
In-House External
Strategies for Success
Changing the Conversation in Facilities Management
Five Strategies for Success
Build strategically
Less can be more
Look ahead Keep-up
Reward savings
Stay Current with All TrendsLet us keep you current, visit our Insights page
If you haven’t downloaded our report, The State of Facilities in Higher Education: 2014 Benchmarks, Best Practices & Trends, please go to sightlines.com for your copy.
Sign up for our monthly newsletter
Read our blog, explore our content
Questions?Please remember to complete the survey after the webinar ends.
Thank you!