facilities maintenance audit report: fy18 - 1003 · preventive and corrective building and grounds...

Facilities Maintenance Audit Report: FY18 - 1003

June 2018

Prepared by Office of Auditor General

8115 Gatehouse Road, Suite 5500 Falls Church, VA 22042

Office of Auditor General of 25

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 3

Background, Scope and Objectives, and Methodology ........................................................ 4

Background .................................................................................................................. 4

Scope and Objectives .................................................................................................. 6

Methodology ................................................................................................................. 7

Audit Findings, Recommendations, and Management’s Responses ................................... 8

Finding 1 – Staffing Shortage Impacts Maintenance Program .................................. 8

Finding 2 – Insufficient Funding .................................................................................14

Finding 3 – Bleacher Inspections ...............................................................................17

Finding 4 – Need for Asset-Level Facility Condition Assessment ...........................19

Finding 5 – Teamworks Inefficiencies ........................................................................22

Observation – Current standard operating procedures ............................................25


Executive Summary The Office of Auditor General (OAG) conducted a performance audit of the Office of Facilities Management’s (OFM) Facilities Maintenance program in accordance with the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 audit plan approved by the Fairfax County School Board. OFM is responsible for routine preventive and corrective building and grounds maintenance services, facilities infrastructure repair and replacement, and energy conservation in the design and operation of Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) facilities. The audit purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of key processes and internal controls related to facilities maintenance. The audit covered July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017. The primary objectives of the audit were to perform the following:

• Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiencies of existing facilities maintenance controls, procedures, and reporting;

• Obtain and review laws, rules and regulations, including policies and procedures to determine if maintenance activities are operating in compliance with federal, state, local and FCPS directives;

• Review preventative maintenance procedures, work orders (timeliness, priorities and emergency procedures);

• Perform an independent, physical verification of sampled inventory and critical assets (i.e. HVAC, Steam, Generator, Boiler, & Indoor Air Quality).

OFM strives for excellence in its maintenance of over 27 million square feet of FCPS facilities. Their initiatives help FCPS in providing a safe and comfortable environment that supports teaching and learning. A primary objective is to work diligently to minimize both, disruptions and equipment failures. Despite these positive attributes, OFM continues to face a number of obstacles. A significant obstacle is managing maintenance, repairs, and replacement projects with limited resources that must be carefully allocated. Additionally, many corrective actions stemming from the Facility Engineering Associates’ (FEA) Final Report for Performance Management Assessment dated July 6, 2012 (FEA Report) have been pending due to resource (staffing and funding) limitations despite OFM’s efforts to prioritize and implement key recommendations. To initiate a Preventive Maintenance (PM) program, OFM utilized night operations with existing employees to minimize the impact during instructional time. Maintainable space is expected to increase as renovations and new square footage is added. These challenges curtail OFM’s ability to conduct an effective and efficient maintenance program. In this report, OAG identified five findings: (1) trades staffing shortage, (2) insufficient funding to address maintenance priorities and backlog of deferred maintenance, (3) noncompliance with Virginia Construction Code and industry standards for bleacher inspections, (4) need for asset-level facility condition assessment, and (5) inefficiencies related to Teamworks (commercial off-the-shelf, computerized maintenance management system (CMMS)). By adequately addressing these findings, FCPS has opportunities to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of OFM’s facilities maintenance program. We appreciate the consultation, cooperation, and courtesies extended to our staff by the Office of Facilities Management.


Background, Scope and Objectives, and Methodology Background The mission of the Department of Facilities and Transportation Services (FTS) is to provide facilities that are clean, safe, energy efficient, sustainable, comfortable, and conducive to efficient and effective educational and support activities; to provide safe and efficient student transportation; and to protect students, employees, grounds, and property. OFM, which is an office within FTS, focuses on realistic management effectiveness, facilities maintenance benchmarking, work order productivity and response efficiency, while addressing adequacy of staffing levels and alignment and prioritization of resources. OFM strives to provide an effective evaluation of the overall stewardship of FCPS facilities with respect to routine maintenance practices and capital renewal including the evaluation and recommendations regarding appropriateness of operational and capital funding levels. In addition, OFM provides the utility management and plant operations for a comfortable, clean and healthy educationally inspiring environment for our students and staff. OFM is responsible for routine preventive and corrective building and grounds maintenance services, facilities infrastructure repair and replacement, and energy conservation in the design and operation of FCPS facilities. Per the FY18 FCPS Program Budget Report (pages 303 and 306), the budget expenditure for OFM (includes Facilities Management and Plant Operations) was $63.4M. OFM is comprised of 497.8 positions, which is inclusive of the director to all of the front-line trades/crafts positions. Both the budgeted expenditures and the number of positions allotted for OFM have been relatively flat over the last three years. Based upon our discussion with OFM management, OFM includes 43 school-based operating engineer positions. Additionally, the following nonschool-based staff supports the Facilities Maintenance program:

• 10.5 administrators • 10.6 office positions • 49.7 specialists • 323.0 tradesperson positions

Plant Operations includes 33 school-based field custodian positions and the following nonschool-based staff: one administrator, two specialists, and 25 custodial positions. OFM is responsible for operating and maintaining 198 schools and centers totaling over 27 million square feet and approximately 3,800 acres, including 22 other administrative and support buildings. OFM is organized to include centralized management, planning support, decentralized maintenance, and repair shops. The centralized sections include: facilities resource management, infrastructure and environmental management, planning and operations, energy management, and plant operations. Maintenance and repair of all mechanical, electrical, and structural equipment and systems is provided by technicians located in four decentralized satellite maintenance facilities. Two additional sections provide grounds maintenance and centralized trades functions.


Exhibit 1 - FCPS OFM Organization Chart

The Facilities Resource Management section provides operational and administrative support to Sideburn Center, the Grounds and Central Operations at Woodson and the satellite centers noted in the org chart above. The Asset Management section was established in 2013 as a result of the FEA Report recommendation. This group’s responsibilities include planning, managing, and coordinating OFM’s system-wide facilities asset management program. AM also entails developing data and process standards, performing data quality controls for asset data submissions, and conducting asset audits. They also perform data analysis, forecasting, reporting and program evaluation, as necessary. The Planning and Operations section is responsible for strategic planning and operational support for OFM. It provides technical and operational support to the trade groups, develops and implements the staff development training and testing program, and manages contract development and oversight for the department. In addition, this section administers the preventive maintenance program within OFM. Organizationally, under the Planning and Operations section are satellite support centers that provide area coverage of the FCPS facilities. The satellite concept, which was implemented in 2005, places school facilities maintenance crews closer to customers for increased efficiency and quicker response time. These satellite support centers primarily provide inspection, maintenance, repair service and access to stock inventory items. The Infrastructure and Environmental Engineering (IEE) section provides technical support and construction and contract management for the maintenance and repair of FCPS buildings and grounds. Services include asbestos and radon abatement, underground storage tank remediation, indoor air quality projects, and monitoring and mitigation of environmental hazards in FCPS buildings. IEE also provides project management for capital outlay and minor


improvement projects including: infrastructure bond replacement of HVAC, boilers, and asphalt pavements. The Energy Management section is responsible for preparing utility consumption forecasts; managing utility contracts and rate schedules; implementing energy-related mandates; monitoring utility bills and fuel oil inventory. Furthermore, OFM is tasked to keep utility bills as low as possible through development and implementation of conservation programs. The Plant Operations section provides custodial staffing information, technical assistance, training, supply management, and pest control services to all FCPS facilities. The Central Operations section is comprised of two branches, mechanical and structural, that provide fire sprinkler systems services, and a machine shop services, and repairs to a variety of equipment such as cabinetry, locks, sheet metal, welding and roofing. The Grounds Operations section is responsible for the general landscape and hardscape maintenance at all school systems facilities, in addition to service and repair for all school and department based grounds care equipment. Industry literature on facility maintenance defines maintenance in a variety of ways. For the purposes of this audit report, the following definitions of the components of maintenance will be used:

• Preventive maintenance (PM) – planned and periodic inspection, adjustment, protection, and minor replacement of building system elements and components. The goal of preventive maintenance is to maximize the useful life of the physical asset and ensure optimal and efficient operations. Typical preventive maintenance tasks may include painting exterior walls and windows, lubricating and adjusting motors, replacing filters and cleaning drains, and testing alarms and security systems.

• Reactive maintenance (RM) – unplanned repair of inoperative, deficient, or damaged building system elements and components to return the item to working order. Repair maintenance may be an emergency or routine in nature given the severity of the inoperative component and its impact on the health and safety of the occupants.

• Deferred Maintenance – Maintenance, system upgrades, or repairs that were deferred to a future budget cycle or postponed until funding was available.

Scope and Objectives We conducted this audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards, with the exception of peer review. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. The audit covered July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017. The objectives of the audit were to:

• Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiencies of existing facilities maintenance controls, procedures, and reporting;


• Obtain and review laws, rules and regulations, including policies and procedures to determine if maintenance activities are operating in compliance with federal, state, local and FCPS directives;

• Review preventative maintenance procedures, work orders (timeliness, priorities and emergency procedures);

• Perform an independent, physical verification of sampled inventory and critical assets. Based on our risk assessment, the focus of this audit was on facilities maintenance - OFM’s operations, asset management, and resource management sections. As such, the scope of this audit did not include areas such as plant operations (custodial services), infrastructure and environmental engineering (IEE) and energy management. Methodology To fulfill the audit objectives, the audit team performed the following:

• met with and interviewed OFM management and staff members, • analyzed financial data, including trend and benchmarking information, • reviewed applicable laws, rules, regulations, and FCPS policies and procedures, • observed and evaluated current practices, tested internal controls, and • performed an independent physical verification of sampled inventory and critical assets.

As part of the independent verification of sampled inventory and critical assets, OAG used stratified random sampling to test 35 stock items out of 143 material inventory items (greater than $1K). For critical assets, we used judgmental sampling to select a total of 20 assets from four aging schools based on volume of work orders. We observed a real-time inventory count at OFM satellite warehouses. We also viewed the physical condition of a sample of physical assets at four school locations. No reportable findings were identified. The Office of Auditor General (OAG) is free from organizational impairments to independence in our reporting as defined by government auditing standards. OAG reports directly to the School Board through the Audit Committee. We report the results of our audits to the Audit Committee and the reports are made available to the public via the FCPS website.


Audit Findings, Recommendations, and Management’s Responses The findings within this report have been attributed a risk rating in accordance with established risk criteria as defined in Table 1:

Table 1 – Risk Criteria

Type Description High One or more of the following exists:

Controls are not in place or are inadequate. Compliance with legislation and regulations or contractual obligations is inadequate. Important issues are identified that could negatively impact the achievement of FCPS program/operational objectives.

Moderate One or more of the following exists: Controls are in place but are not sufficiently complied with. Compliance with subject government regulations or FCPS policies and established procedures is inadequate, or FCPS policies and established procedures are inadequate. Issues are identified that could negatively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of FCPS operations.

Low One or more of the following exists: Controls are in place but the level of compliance varies. Compliance with government regulations or FCPS policies and established procedures varies. Issues identified are less significant but opportunities exist that could enhance FCPS operations.

During this audit, OAG identified five moderate risk findings which are detailed below:

Finding 1 – Staffing Shortage Impacts Maintenance Program Risk Rating – Moderate: Issues are identified that could negatively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of FCPS operations. Condition:

OFM lacks the adequate number of tradespersons to sufficiently maintain FCPS assets and facilities. OFM is short 252 tradespersons compared to the APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities industry standard. Due to the trades staffing shortage and the high demand to perform reactive maintenance (RM) on aging assets, the preventive maintenance (PM) program is incomplete and insufficient. Currently, PM is less than 20% of total maintenance conducted by OFM.


Exhibit 2 – FCPS PM to RM Maintenance Ratio for FY17

Note: 487,895 total maintenance labor hours were reported for FY17 from Teamworks, OFM’s system of record.

OAG sought to determine how RM was impacted by the trade shortage by reviewing the timely completion of certain types of work orders. Per OFM, emergencies should be completed within 24-48 hours and serious work orders within one week. OAG extracted “Emergency” and “Serious” completed work orders for a selection of critical assets (i.e. HVAC, Steam, Generator, Boiler, & Indoor Air Quality) out of Teamworks from July 2016 through December 2017. RM work orders While work orders were responded to timely per OFM, RM was not completed timely for several Emergency and Serious work orders. OFM receives over 80,000 work orders per year. OAG identified seven emergency work orders and 12 serious work orders that were open for greater than 360 days. Additionally, there were 415 “Emergency” work orders and 728 “Serious” work orders that were completed beyond 30 days of receipt. Per OFM, a tradespersons would have responded to the open work orders timely but additional work was necessary at a future date. For example, if a leak is found at the end of heating season and facilities are switching over to the cooling season the following week; OFM may opt to wait until the start of the next heating season to make repairs. This is to prioritize the workload on cooling units that need immediate attention. Current and future state of trade staffing Based on interviews with OFM coordinators, there are 30-34 vacancies at any given time. An opportunity exist to expand OFM staffing through an apprenticeship program. Entry level positions can be filled at a lower cost compared to hiring externally. Currently, inexperienced students in FCPS’ Career and Technical Education program are not qualified for existing trade job openings. It appears that an apprenticeship program would expand OFM’s pool of resources to complete maintenance and help increase efficiency. For example, OFM typically uses three skilled tradespersons or less for a job that requires one tradesperson and two apprentices when maintenance is required within confined space areas. Confined spaces include but are not limited to equipment housings, ductwork, pipelines, etc. If more apprentices were available, tradespersons could be re-allocated to complete technical maintenance activities.

18% / 88,944 Labor Hours

82% / 398,951 Labor Hours

FCPS Maintenance FY17

Preventive Reactive


In addition, the Fairfax County Employee Retirement System (FCERS) indicates 140 OFM employees are retirement eligible now through the next five years. This contributes an additional level of stress to the staff shortage issue.

Criteria:

(1) Staffing - An adequate supply of tradespersons are required to maintain, repair, and replace facility assets in a timely manner while increasing the effectiveness of the PM program. According to the APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities, a staffing ratio should be adopted for one full time tradesperson (FTE) for every 49,000 square feet to provide a level 2 type of service, Comprehensive Stewardship which includes one apprentice per four tradespersons.

Exhibit 3 - Volume of 2018 Trades staff vs. APPA Standard

*2018 volume is based on OFM’s system of record, Teamworks. The number includes tradespersons, those who work with hand tools, and excludes groundskeepers and custodians. As seen in the chart, there is a shortage of 124 tradespersons and 128 apprentices; total 252.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) standard (29 CFR 1910.146) for confined space requires at least three persons for safety reasons, such as unguarded machinery or heat stress. One person is needed to complete the work (authorized entrant), one attendant for support, and one entry supervisor. (2) PM/RM - According to the APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities (APPA), PM

should make up between 65-85% of total maintenance. The remaining percentage of RM should fall between 15-35%. In light of the current state of OFM, OAG presented the lower range of the recommended PM to RM ratio. The following chart displays the range.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2018 Volume* APPA Standard

290414

9

137

2018 Tradespersons vs APPA standard

Skilled Trades Apprentices


Exhibit 4 – APPA Optimal Maintenance Ratio

Cause:

Economic conditions from the 1990s through the late 2000s have resulted in compounding budget reductions for OFM operations. Without restoration of funding levels, proper staffing levels are unattainable. Additionally, the private sector pays more for equivalent trade skills needed by OFM so vacancies have been difficult to fill. Furthermore, ongoing facility expansion (i.e. additions, new structures, maintainable space and assets) limit OFM’s ability to schedule and complete PM on all critical assets within FCPS. As such, OFM has to concentrate on RM. The current state of PM is impacted by the following drivers:

• Implementation of non-standard equipment across schools • Training tradespersons to maintain and repair the non-standard equipment • Customized parts versus standard parts that can be purchased and stored in

larger quantities • Wear and tear on existing facilities during non-school hours which prompts RM. • Shortage of tradespersons • Insufficient funding • Inaccurate system data, necessary software improvements and limited reporting

capabilities, such as, the lack of management and supervisory dashboards • Dashboards would allow OFM to trend PM, pending work orders, and types of

equipment more effectively and efficiently. Effect:

Insufficient levels of trade staff will result in one or more of the following: • Operational inefficiency • Insufficient PM • Deferred maintenance increases • Rising maintenance and replacement costs • Failing assets • Unsustainable workloads • Loss of trades staff and institutional knowledge • Inability to retain, attract and replace skilled tradespersons • Higher cost for contracted labor to address needs that OFM cannot

65%35%

APPA Optimal Maintenance Ratio

Preventive Reactive


• Incompletion of previously scheduled PM • Delays in response times to routine requests • Lost instructional time • Unsafe conditions for persons located within or nearby a facility • Negative publicity/reputation damage

Example - A chiller (red box in first photo) equipment failure occurred on May 2, 2018 at Oakton High School. This school is included in the current Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and showing signs of breakdown before scheduled renovation. A rupture guard (red arrow in second photo), fail safe on chiller which is similar to a circuit breaker in a home, failed and disabled air conditioning for 85% of the school. The chiller is eight years past its normal lifecycle. The part had to be overnighted to arrive on May 3 and repaired, worst case by May 7. This disruption occurred during 90°F days. Fans were purchased, and classes were moved from the upper level to other locations as spaces became available. It was reported to OAG that the internal temperature, as of May 3, was 70°-75°F. Due to the design of the piping in the school, the OFM liaison saw no provision for a temporary chiller to be connected. If a temporary chiller was rented, it would cost $16-20K for one-month based on the size and associated fees/expenses. Larger chillers cost $30K to rent per month.

Exhibit 5 - Chiller (first) and related broken rupture guard (second) at Oakton High School

Another example of an equipment failure occurred on June 20, 2017. A chiller stopped working during summer at Aldrin Elementary. The impact to the school was minimal because children were on a field day and it was close to the end of the school year; nonetheless, a temporary chiller was rented at a cost of $16K.

Recommendation:

OAG recommends OFM consider: • Developing a methodology to increase the volume of qualified tradespersons. For

example, re-establishing an apprenticeship program to include current FCPS trade students.

• Adhering to the APPA staffing formula for OFM trade functions. • Continuing to develop the PM program and setting realistic goals to measure

progress. For example, extend the PM program to additional assets or adjust the standard PM level to 60-65% versus 80% as previously communicated by OFM.


Management Response (Actions and Due Date):

Management Concurs – Please note the Budget Office and Leadership will have to support. Due Date: September 2018

Current Status: Open


Finding 2 – Insufficient Funding Risk Rating – Moderate: Issues are identified that could negatively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of FCPS operations. Condition:

Insufficient funding to address maintenance priorities and backlog of deferred maintenance.

There is an imminent need to increase capital and major maintenance funds to replace assets as they reach the end of their expected life cycles. It is estimated that deferred maintenance backlog will continue to increase due to limited funding and as new assets are inventoried and cataloged. In addition, due to the lengthened renovation cycle (currently around 37 years between renovations at any single school), more burden is placed on OFM to maintain and replace costly major systems. One year’s backlog of deferred maintenance (assets) is currently valued at $136M for FY18.

The Facilities Planning Advisory Council’s (FPAC) Semi-Annual Report dated February 12, 2018, indicated that based on benchmarking provided by 21st Century School Fund Report, FCPS’ maintenance is significantly underfunded, causing increased degradation of major building systems. In addition, as emphasized in the FY18 FCPS Budget Publication, more resources are necessary for capital system replacements to minimize failures adversely impacting our educational environment. According to OFM, FCPS’ estimated Current Replacement Value (CRV) for FY17 is approximately $6.2B. The chart below illustrates the funding shortfalls (shown in $M) between spending recommended by 21st Century Schools Report to FCPS’ budgeted spending. Exhibit 6 – FCPS 2017 Maintenance Budget vs. 21st Century School Report


Criteria:

The “2016 State of our Schools: America's K–12 Facilities” report is a joint publication of the 21st Century School Fund, the National Council on School Facilities and the U.S. Green Building Council. As outlined in the Executive Summary section of the aforementioned report, “A large and growing body of evidence demonstrates that school facilities have a direct impact on student learning, student and staff health, and school finances. But too many students attend school facilities that fall short of providing 21st century learning environments because essential maintenance and capital improvements are underfunded.” This report proposes national standards for school facilities based on building industry best practices. The percentages, below, refer to the percentage of facilities’ current replacement value (CRV) that should be invested annually to maintain school buildings in good condition. The recommended budget levels for Maintenance & Operations, as a percentage of the current replacement value (CRV) is as follows:

• Annual Maintenance & Operations (M&O) = 3% of CRV • Periodic Renewals/Major Maintenance = 2% of CRV • As-Needed Alternations = 1% of CRV • Systematic Reduction of Deferred Maintenance = 1% of CRV

Exhibit 7 - Recommended budget levels for Maintenance & Operations

' Cause:

See Cause section under Finding #1.


Effect:

Insufficient funding for OFM’s Capital Replacement Program has created an environment where potential equipment failures are on the rise, causing increased degradation of major building systems. These impacts also increase costs to FCPS and can potentially introduce disruption of instructional time.

Recommendation:

Consistent with recommendations put forth by the FPAC, OAG offers the following for consideration:

1. Develop a backlog reduction spending plan equal to 1% of the current replacement value, or $62M/year, to align with industry standards. If this is not feasible, determine the amount of funds necessary to keep the backlog from increasing year over year, and fund at least that amount.

2. Develop a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan that includes all aspects of facilities and integrates the maintenance and renovation requirements of the CICP (Comprehensive Investment Capital Program) and the CIP (Capital Improvement Program) and other related programs.

3. Elevate concerns to Leadership Team and School Board so they can evaluate the need to increase dedicated funding to address delayed major maintenance.


Management concurs with the recommendations. Due Date: September 2018



Finding 3 – Bleacher Inspections Risk Rating – Moderate: Compliance with subject government regulations or FCPS policies and established procedures is inadequate, or FCPS policies and established procedures are inadequate. Condition:

Based on inquiries performed with OFM personnel, FCPS has a noncompliance issue with bleacher inspection. Industry standards require an annual inspection be performed by an engineer, registered architect, or manufacturer-certified inspector. See “Criteria” section for further details. However, FCPS does not have a funded contract vehicle nor qualified personnel to perform the necessary certified bleacher inspections. As a compensating measure and per Regulation 8580, “Operations and Maintenance of Buildings, Grounds and Equipment, Indoor and Outdoor Bleachers”, OFM (Metal Shop at Central Operations) is to conduct in-house inspections as follows: OFM inspects middle school bleachers annually and high and secondary school bleachers semi-annually for structural soundness and proper operation. Needed repairs identified in these inspections are to be made by OFM. Schools are required to contact OFM if conditions necessitate additional inspections.

Criteria:

As of January 2007, the Division of the State Architect (DSA), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the International Code Council (ICC) has collectively adopted new and more stringent guidelines regarding bleacher and grandstand inspections, maintenance and repair. The Virginia Construction Code 1028.1.1 states that “Bleachers, grandstands, and folding and telescoping seating…shall comply with ICC 300." ICC 300 section 501.2 states “all existing tiered seating shall be inspected and evaluated at least once a year by a qualified person.”

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 102 Standard for Grandstands, Folding and Telescopic Seating, Tents, and Membrane Structures, requires that all outdoor grandstands and folding or telescoping seating be inspected annually by an engineer, registered architect or manufacturer-certified inspector.

Cause:

Lack of adequate funding and/or not having the appropriate certified personnel to perform bleacher inspection has prevented OFM from being able to prioritize this initiative.

Effect:

Noncompliance with bleacher inspections may result in unsafe conditions, potential fines and penalties, and reputation damage to FCPS.


Recommendations:

Annual inspections should be conducted by certified personnel of all bleachers at applicable schools. OFM should consider developing an inspection form to document inspection results and to facilitate the effective communication of any necessary corrective work orders, which should be reviewed, scheduled and performed in a timely manner.


Management concurs with the recommendations, but would require dedicated funding for 3rd party certification, and 1 Full Time Employee (FTE) to manage the program. Due Date: September 2018



Finding 4 – Need for Asset-Level Facility Condition Assessment Risk Rating – Moderate: Issues are identified that could negatively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of FCPS operations. Condition:

FCPS has not performed an asset-level facility condition assessment (FCA) to adequately validate the deferred maintenance backlog to assist with prioritization of capital renewal needs. For FY2018, the backlog dollar value was estimated at $136M per FCPS’ Asset Forecast Report.

While the Asset Management (AM) team has made great strides to asset tag and inventory applicable equipment since this group was established in 2013, the true physical condition of the assets may not reflect what is currently captured in the Asset Forecast Report. This report is primarily based on a mathematical formula derived from the date of when the equipment was placed in service and its remaining useful life, based on life cycle of major systems. FCA is defined as the process of developing a comprehensive picture of physical conditions and the functional performance of buildings and infrastructure; analyzing the results of data collection and observations; and reporting and presenting findings. The main objective of the FCA is to measure the condition and functionality factors that make both the building and its infrastructure of adequate condition and appropriate for intended functions. OFM has formulated a clear outline on how the asset-level FCA should be implemented via a multi-phased approach. OFM has prepared and submitted FCPS’ “Multi-year Initiatives Funding Request Form” for the FY2018-2022 period in an effort to elevate the need for this project. The first phase would entail the execution of a high-level facilities inspection (at the asset level) using parametric estimating methods to establish the order in which more in-depth inspections should occur and to develop overall budgetary requirements. It is important to differentiate that the “base condition assessment” completed by the AM team provides a preliminary assessment index (AI) of each asset listed on the Comprehensive Investment Capital Plan (CICP). However, this is based primarily on the capital asset’s useful life and the criticality level of the asset type and does not take into consideration the true physical condition of each asset independently, based on industry facility condition standards. This gap creates a disadvantage and limits OFM’s effectiveness in prioritizing capital renewal needs. Accomplishments: To date, key infrastructure assets at all FCPS buildings, except those currently under Design and Construction renovation, have been inventoried. However, many asset categories, such as field/grounds maintenance (athletic fields, athletic fencing and backstops), storm water management facility and electric disconnects to name a few examples, have not been inventoried or completed and are therefore not reflected in the current CICP (Asset Forecast). FCPS’ current deferred maintenance backlog is expected to grow considerably to better represent the true backlog.


Criteria:

Per Policy 8258.2, Building Evaluation, Building Renovation, and Infrastructure Maintenance, section III, “Building Evaluation and Renovation”: Existing older buildings shall be evaluated periodically to determine their ability to support the approved educational program and the safety and operability of the building systems. Buildings shall be selected for renovation on the basis of the condition of the building, the suitability of facilities to support the instructional program, and the long range potential of the building. It shall be the goal of the Fairfax County School Board to provide for the systematic renovation of the school facilities and other School Board-owned buildings. Further, it shall be the goal of the Fairfax County School Board that school facilities be renovated on a 20- to 25-year cycle. Building renovations shall be designed to meet the needs of the educational program and to extend the useful life of a facility by 20 or more years. A program to renovate and update substandard older schools shall be an integral part of the capital improvement program. And per section IV, “Building Infrastructure Maintenance”: It shall be the further goal of the Fairfax County School Board to provide for the systematic maintenance of major and critical building infrastructure components, primarily through the comprehensive building renovation program and, additionally, through the establishment of infrastructure maintenance programs in annual planning and budgeting. Infrastructure maintenance programs shall be based on the life cycle expectancy of building systems and components and shall assure that mechanical, electrical, electronic, and structural systems will support the effective and efficient operation of buildings.

Cause:

The lengthy and extending renovation cycle, currently around 37 years, between renovations at any single school, has placed significant pressure on the major systems that are often required to run past their useful life cycle.

Effect:

OFM may not be able to effectively and efficiently prioritize capital renewal needs and distribute maintenance efforts to schools to remediate known and potential deficiencies.

Recommendations:

Consistent with the recommendation put forth by the FPAC as well as in the 2012 FEA Report, OAG offers the following for consideration: OFM develop a proactive facilities maintenance program, to include: implementing a systematic review process to inspect all facilities over a five-year period, or 20% of facilities each year.


This effort will allow FCPS to have regular assessments of schools, identify specific projects, and allow the School Board and staff to ensure most urgent requirements are being addressed in a timely manner.


Management concurs with the recommendations, but would require dedicated funding and FTEs to manage the program. Due Date: September 2018



Finding 5 – Teamworks Inefficiencies Risk Rating – Moderate: Issues are identified that could negatively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of FCPS operations. Condition:

Since 2008, OFM has been utilizing a CMMS (computerized maintenance management system) called Teamworks, which is an integrated facilities management system. This system includes modules/applications to manage facility-related tasks, such as maintenance work orders, asset management, inventory management, and customer satisfaction surveys. Teamworks, OFM’s system of record, has opportunities for improvement in the following areas:

1. Data field names and content 2. Reporting timeliness and accuracy via dashboards 3. Communication between maintenance departments and software vendor

1. Data field names and content - At times, data fields and content are inconsistent and contradict one another within Teamworks. To highlight a few examples, the model number field is the garage location; the trade code field contains the assigned vehicle location; the supervisor field is the employee base location and not the employee’s supervisor; and the pay period field is used for the FCPS employee ID.

2. Reporting timeliness and accuracy via dashboards - Reporting is produced, at a fixed point in time, and does not provide real time data for OFM. For example, preventive and reactive maintenance total labor hours must be extracted weeks before the end of the fiscal year. When OAG requested FY17 maintenance labor hours for PM and RM, the RM number changed by almost 9,000 hours, which is a reflection of the timing difference. Additionally, real time dashboards are not available for OFM to make informed decisions based on real time data.

3. Communication between maintenance departments and software vendor - While maintenance teams communicate to resolve work orders entered into Teamworks, there are instances when work orders remain open for a prolonged period of time due to a breakdown in communication. Several maintenance shops may open a work order to resolve a problem which may not get closed. A work order may need to be transferred to another team manually creating further inefficiencies. Additionally, OFM disclosed that there are different versions of Teamworks being used across the department. Operational inefficiencies occur without consistent tools and process methods. Additional contract monitoring and training is necessary to increase awareness of this concern and assess its impact to OFM.


Criteria:

Real time dashboards should be used by current facilities management to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of maintenance operations. According to the 2012 Facility Engineering Associates report, dashboards are recommended for supervisors to incorporate metrics showing outstanding work orders, responsibilities and current status of trades, and other measurable Key Performance Indicators. The APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities also promotes the use of dashboards in managing facilities maintenance. Fairfax County purchased the ArcGIS system which enables the county to monitor and manage its facility maintenance activities, such as storm water, in real time at the click of a button.

Cause:

The primary responsibility of facilities maintenance is to prevent and repair assets at facilities. Data entry is secondary or tertiary for the tradesperson who is responsible for entering information into the system of record. As inaccurate or incomplete data is entered and retained over a period of years, a snowball effect exists within Teamworks. A data cleanup is necessary however, funding is limited to make the relevant updates with the assistance of the Customer Service Team and/or the software vendor. Lack of accountability for data entry, budget resource constraints and staff turnover has led to inefficient data analysis, and ineffective communication between maintenance teams and the software vendor.

Effect:

Operational inefficiencies and confusion may result from extracting data that must be scrubbed and reorganized. Additionally, utilizing untimely reports to perform data analysis precludes OFM from making effective decisions based on real time data.

Recommendations:

In order to close this finding, OFM should consider: (1) Developing a strategy to clean up data fieldnames and tables. This could involve

coordinating and communicating with the relevant parties (i.e., Customer Service team or software vendor) to update field names and data tables with proper content within Teamworks.

(2) Creating standard operating procedures (SOP) to direct positive behavior towards data entry into the system of record.

(3) Training and incentivizing tradespersons to prioritize data entry. (4) Establishing management and supervisory dashboards using Teamworks or

another application, such as ArcGIS used by Fairfax County, to enable management to make efficient, real time decisions.

(5) Explore other interactive CMMS applications to incorporate into the Facilities Maintenance program.



Management concurs with the recommendations, but would require dedicated funding for new CMMS and IT support. Due Date: September 2018



Observation – Current standard operating procedures Current standard operating procedures (SOPs) are not documented across departments within OFM. Current operating procedures were requested throughout interviews with coordinators and supervisors but were unavailable. OFM created emergency procedures to address dangerous hazards such as water leaks, fires, etc. Daily operations are inherently within the minds of personnel with first-hand knowledge and experience. Inconsistency was found regarding the retention of work order resolution notes within Teamworks. Teamworks retains work order resolution notes as entered by the tradesperson or technician. For July 2016 – December 2017, OAG noted three instances of asbestos work orders that did not appear to have a work order resolution documented in Teamworks. Upon further review, the OFM Environmental Technician created written resolution notes for the work order however, these written notes were not uploaded or included in Teamworks for these types of work orders. After internal discussion among Infrastructure & Environmental Engineering (IEE) and the work order team, written notes will be included and uploaded as part of the work order procedure when closing environmental work orders. A written SOP would help to drive consistency in this instance. Conflicting priorities, such as increasing daily workloads, and manual processes has deferred and demoted the importance of SOPs over time. SOPs should be available to employees to provide direction for daily activities. Procedures ensure processes are guided and communicated in a consistent manner to meet an organization’s objectives. Key person risk increases with the passage of time. Operational ineffectiveness and inefficiency can result from the departure of essential personnel with institutional knowledge of daily operations. Without SOPs, new hires and inexperienced managers will not be able to properly evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of their program. OFM would benefit from developing a methodology to record critical tasks and daily processes over a period of time for OFM Support and Operations. Also highlighting important decision making points and appropriate escalations.

facilities maintenance audit report: fy18 - 1003 · preventive and corrective building and grounds...

Documents