Assessments

What is the importance of facility assessments and how do they influence the development of the Facilities Master Plan?  There are several reasons to complete facility assessments during the master planning process.  Some of these reasons are:

1. Facility assessments provide a clear snapshot of the condition of our current facilities.  Even though our facilities appear to be in good repair, some of them are more than 50 years old and the needs are not always readily apparent to the bystander.
2. Facility assessments allow us to develop a maintenance cost schedule for the next 20 years.  We need to plan for the cost of replacing roofs, repainting, changing light fixtures or utilities.  An interesting fact is that the maintenance and operation of a facility, over a 50-year life span, often accounts for 80% of the cost of that facility.
3. Perhaps the maintenance schedule is calling for the replacement of a building's roof and electrical system.  The master plan for the campus shows that this building is slated for demolition within the next five years.  At this point it would not be prudent to follow the maintenance schedule but rather forgo the roofing and electrical replacement.

The assessments are categorized in terms of immediate, short-term, mid-term, and long-term needs. The resulting costs associated with each of these categories are assembled into an interactive table to help our community understand the cost of maintaining our current facilities in the absence of a program to modernize, replace or remove aging buildings.

These repair items help to establish timelines for projects while project costs are developed. The sums of the expected costs are then weighed against the replacement value of each school to determine the Replacement Cost Index (RCI). This value is important when considering whether a facility should be improved or replaced.

Please take the time to review the Facility Condition Assessment for each of our campuses.  

Categories

The assessment process involved a team of trained field assessors visiting every site within the District to review, photograph, and note physical condition deficiencies related to predetermined major review categories.

Assessment Reports

Maintenance Costs

Anticipated costs associated with maintaining and repairing the existing school facilities.

• Seismic Repairs are related to the “AB 300” seismic (earthquake) safety survey of certain types of structures that were constructed prior to the 1976 California Building Code and are currently used by K-12 students and teachers. The AB 300 requirements apply to buildings whose primary structural frame consists of concrete, masonry, or steel; wood frame buildings are excluded.
• Immediate Repairs are items that must be addressed within the next year (also known as “Year 0”). Immediate Repairs require immediate action. This could be due to existing or potential unsafe conditions; building or fire code violations; or conditions that, if not addressed, have the potential to result in, or contribute to, critical element or system failure within one year or will most probably result in a significant escalation of its remedial cost.
• Replacement Reserves are for recurring probable expenditures, which are not classified as operation or maintenance expenses (covering Years 1 through 10). Replacement Reserves are reasonably predictable both in terms of frequency and cost; however, this category may also include components or systems that have an indeterminable life but, nonetheless, have a potential for failure within an estimated time period. Replacement Reserves exclude systems or components that are not considered material to the structural and mechanical integrity of the subject property.
• Long-Term Items are similar to Replacement Reserve items but will incur costs more than 10 years from now (also known as Years 11 through 19). While still reasonably predictable, this category is more subject to fluctuations based on future needs and unforeseen developments in technology and processes.

In addition to these categories, the Immediate Repairs and Replacement Reserves costs can be combined as a Capital Needs Total budget (short-term costs from Year 0 through Year 10, plus AB300 Seismic Repairs where applicable); and the Capital Needs and Long-Term Items costs can be combined as a Deficiency Repair Total budget (long-term costs from Year 0 through Year 19, plus AB300 Seismic Repairs where applicable). The Capital Needs Total is useful for considering near-term costs related to a given site. In contrast, the Deficiency Repair Total is more useful for a long-term forecast of costs if no new work is done.

Replacement Cost Index

FCI versus RCI

Facilities assessments are categorized in terms of immediate, short-term, mid-term, and long-term needs. These maintenance and repair items help to establish timelines for projects while project costs are developed. In the Facilities Assessment Reports, the immediate and 10-year costs are divided by the Current Replacement Value (CRV)—currently $235.00 per square foot of building area—to establish the Current Facility Condition Index (FCI) and 10-Year FCI, respectively, as percentage values. The lower the FCI, the better assumed condition of the facility, with 0.0% FCI equating to perfect condition.

Facility Condition Index (FCI) Replacement Cost Index (RCI) Current: (Seismic + Immediate Repairs) ÷ CRV 10-Year: Capital Needs Total ÷ CRV (CRV + Long-Term Items) ÷ Deficiency Repair Total

In contrast, the Replacement Cost Index (RCI) looks at the ratio of CRV to long-term maintenance and repair costs. The sums of the expected costs over the next two decades are weighed against the CRV of each school plus maintenance costs for Long-Term Items (11 to 19 years) to determine the RCI. (Long-term maintenance costs are generally the same regardless of building age, so they are included on both sides of this ratio.)

RCI is important when considering whether or not a facility should be improved or replaced. An RCI value less than 1.0 means the cost to replace the existing facilities on a site is less than the cost to maintain those buildings. However, a low RCI does not necessarily mean the facilities on a site will be replaced, just as a high RCI does not necessarily mean the facilities on a site will be maintained. Rather, RCI seeks to establish an approximation of the relative benefits of either action.