University of Nebraska at Lincoln

University of Nebraska Medical Center

University of Nebraska Omaha

University of New Brunswick

University of New Hampshire

University of New Haven

University of New Mexico

University of North Texas

University of Northern Iowa

University of Notre Dame

University of Oregon

University of Pennsylvania

University of Redlands

University of Rhode Island

University of Rochester

University of San Diego

University of San Francisco

University of Southern Maine

University of Southern Mississippi

University of St. Thomas

University of Tennessee Health Science Center

University of Tennessee, Knoxville

University of Texas at Dallas

University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

University of Vermont

Vanderbilt University

Virginia Commonwealth University

Virginia Department of General Services

Wagner College

Wake Forest University

Washburn University

Washington University in St. Louis

Wellesley College

Wesleyan University

West Chester University

West Liberty University

West Virginia Health Science Center

West Virginia Institute of Technology

West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine

West Virginia State University

West Virginia University

Western Connecticut State University

Western Oregon University

Westfield State University

Wheaton College

Widener University

Williams College

Focusing a Campus Investment StrategyPresenters: John Shenette and Dan Starr

About SightlinesLeading provider of facilities intelligence solutions to higher education industry

2

• Sightlines Key Facts

• Founded in 2000

• 360+ ROPA+ Members

• 3 Offices in CT, PA and OR

• Our Facilities Intelligence Solutions deliver:

• Toolkit for data-driven decision making

• Analytical rigor and consistent methodology

• Reliable peer and best practice benchmarking

• Common vocabulary and common platform

• Strategic story-telling platform for Senior Leadership

• Membership, Database, Experience and Client

Performance = engine behind our solutions, insight,

growth and retention

Sightlines Membership & Database Engine

Growing membership and database provides experience and perspective

Partners to the Nation’s Leading Institutions:

• 14 of the Top 20 Colleges*

• 15 of the Top 20 Universities*

• 34 Flagship State Universities

• 13 of the 14 Big 10 Institutions

• 9 of the 12 Ivy Plus Institutions

• 8 of 13 Selective Liberal Arts Colleges

Serving state systems in:

• Alaska

• California

• Connecticut

• Hawaii

• Maine

• Massachusetts

• Minnesota

• Missouri

• New Hampshire

• New Jersey

• Pennsylvania

• Texas

• West Virginia

3

Presenter Snapshot

Dan Starr

4

• Project Lead at Sightlines

• Has worked with Wake Forest since 2014,

on their ROPA+ Analysis and Integrated

Facilities Plan

• Has experience working on over 35

different higher education campuses

• Facilities Analytics and Benchmarking firm

• 450 colleges and universities are Sightlines

clients.

• We have clients in 40 states, the District of

Columbia and four Canadian provinces

Presenter Snapshot

John Shenette

5

• Associate Vice President for Facilities and

Campus Services

• At Wake Forest since 2014, previously at

Smith College in Massachusetts

• Nearly three decades in facilities

management

• University relocated to Winston-Salem in 1956

• Over 4,800 undergraduate and 2,700 graduate

students

• Over 3.7 million gross square feet of building space

at Reynolda campus

Why Sightlines?

Wake Forest reached out to Sightlines as a way to...

6

Reason #1

• Validate feelings with third party data

Reason #2

Reason #3

• Clear, concise deliverables to communicate with campus leaders

• Consistent vocabulary allows for cross-university comparisons

Timeline of Engagement

7

Summer 2014

John contacts Sightlines

to perform ROPA+

Analysis

Fall 2014

ROPA+ findings reveal a

need for a more focused and

comprehensive capital plan

Spring 2015

Sightlines

Integrated Facilities

Plan process begins

Fall 2015

Sightlines IFP identifies

backlog of deferred needs

as well as 10-years of

modernization and repairs

Spring 2014

John Shenette joins the team

at Wake Forest

8

Telling the Facilities Story

• Sightlines collects and assembles data on campus to quantify, verify, and qualify (QVQ) facility performance.Measure

• Through the benchmarking process, institutions have the capability to create custom comparisons that help them understand context and performance.

Benchmark

• Sightlines synthesizes an institution's verified data to provide expert insight and perspective and develop strategic directions for change.

Analyze &

Interpret

• Sightlines continues to support each campus through our Member Portal, national thought leadership, educational webinars, and ongoing campus consultation.

Membership

A Vocabulary for Measurement

The Return on Physical Assets – ROPASM

9

Asset Value Change

The annual

investment needed

to ensure buildings

will properly

perform and reach

their useful life

“Keep-Up Costs”

Annual

Stewardship

The accumulation

of repair and

modernization

needs and the

definition of

resource capacity

to correct them

“Catch-Up Costs”

Asset

Reinvestment

The effectiveness

of the facilities

operating budget,

staffing,

supervision, and

energy

management

Operational

Effectiveness

The measure of

service process,

the maintenance

quality of space

and systems, and

the customers

opinion of service

delivery

Service

Operations Success

Wake Forest is Underspending on Capital...

10

$0.0

$2.0

$4.0

$6.0

$8.0

$10.0

$12.0

$14.0

$16.0

$18.0

$20.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Mil

lio

ns

Spending into Existing Space vs. Targets

Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Target Need

Annual Investment Target

...And Overspending on Operations

11

$-

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

$10.00

A B C D E F WFU G H I

$/G

SF

Operating Actuals vs Peers

Daily Service PM Utilities

Average: $7.26/GSF

Peer Institutions

Boston College

Brown University

Davidson College

Duke University

Princeton University

University of Chicago

University of Notre Dame

Vanderbilt University

Washington University in St. Louis

ROPA+ Findings for Wake Forest

12

Insufficient Capital Investment

Growing Deferred Maintenance

Higher Operating Costs

Impacted Service Levels

1

2

3

4

Today: No Integration in the Process

Rift created between the technical assessment and the project selection is not easily bridged

13

Technical

Assessment

Project

Selection

Traditional Facilities Assessment

Fails to harness

operating knowledge

Does not tie to

mission, strategy or

master plans

Ignores financial

capacity

Too “engineered” to

communicate to

leadership

No accounting for

modernization

Tomorrow: Full Plan Integration

Why the Integrated Facilities Plan over other analyses?

14

Full Inventory

of Projects Apply

Building Portfolio

& Timeframe

Apply

Investment

Criteria &

Timeframe

Multi-Year

Project

Plan

Geographic, Program,

Transitional, & Years

Reliability, Asset Preservation,

Program, Economic Operations,

Safety/Code & Years

Full Inventory of

Projects

Electrical,

Plumbing, HVAC,

Mechanical,

Exterior, Interior,

Safety…

How Do

You Target

Projects

?

Building Portfolio Process

Curr

ent

Challe

nge

Pro

posed S

olu

tion

Electrical,

Plumbing, HVAC,

Mechanical,

Exterior, Interior,

Safety…

Pick

Projects

Process Overview

15

Data Collection

• Campus walk-through and inventory key building components, systems, sub-systems, building characteristics, etc.

Inventory Generation

• Supervisor Interviews, internal and external studies and capital planning integrated together into one inventory of needs

Project Planning Codification

• Applying consistent vocabulary, timeframe and pricing to each project in the inventory

Data Qualification

• Review projects, timeframe and pricing for accuracy

The Scenario at Wake Forest

Immediate needs were primarily life cycle needs in mechanical systems

16

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

To

tal N

ee

d, $

in

mil

lio

ns

10-Year Identified Needs by System and Timeframe

A (1-3 years) B (4-7 years) C (8-10 years)

19%

58%

12%

11%

Backlog Life Cycle

Modernization Infrastructure

10-Year Identified needs by

Project Category

Identifying Risk and Targeting Projects

17

Reliability

Backlog

“A” Timeframe Life Cycle Needs

10-Year Identified NeedsAll identified needs for the next 10 years (2016-2025).

Systems and components that are past due, or will hit end-of-

life expectancy within the next 3 years (2016-2018).

Systems and components that are past due.

Projects that, if not addressed, will displace programs.

Highest risk needs.

$397M

$260M

$85M

$9.4M

Key F

ocus

Building Portfolios

Grouping buildings in order to assess risk and focus investment

18

WFU ReynoldaCampus

$397M

Building Needs

$335M

Building Renovation

$102M

9 Buildings

533k GSF

Acad/Admin

$146M

29 Buildings

1.6M GSF

Residence Halls

$74M

23 Buildings

654k GSF

Student Life

$13M

5 Buildings

121k GSF

Grounds & Infrastructure

$62M

• Not all buildings are created equal.

• Campuses are too complex to manage

by a single strategy.

• Break down the included buildings into

“building portfolios” that are reflective of

the program’s mission and strategic

directions.

• Guide investment to portfolios in a

multi-year strategy, as opposed to “pay-

as-you-go” project by project

investment.

Focusing an Investment Plan

19

What is it that we know about

our needs now?What is it that we can do

within reason?

The total needs are too high

to address completely.

$400M over the next 10

years is not realistic.

True need of $150M over the

next 10 years. An additional

$102M will be addressed

through planned renovations.

Where will we be 10 years

from now?

Will have addressed core

needs and problem

buildings. Therefore, Wake

Forest will be in a more

proactive mode.

Findings for Wake Forest

20

Started the process of

creating a 10-year

facilities plan

Delivered various

methods for prioritizing

projects within the list

Reinforced findings

from the ROPA+

Analysis

Identified all facilities

needs for Wake Forest

over the next 10 years

Reception of IFP

21

What audience heard the message?

What did they take away from the meeting?

How did we get buy-in across

campus?

• Senior Administration

• Board of Trustees

• Department Heads

• Facilities Organization

• Understanding of the need

• Strategic approach

• It’s a campus effort

• Results and investment over time

• On going process

• Involved campus partners, Provost, Deans, RLH,

Athletics

• Informational presentations to Senior Administration

• Trustee committee presentations, Audit and

Compliance, Administration