What if you had the tools to create a common vocabulary at your institution that enables stakeholders to get the most from campus space, invest capital dollars strategically to support mission, and reduce the overhead of daily facilities operations? Explore this presentation to learn how finance and facilities leaders are using Sightlines' facilities intelligence solutions to: * Unite the often disjointed policies surrounding space management, capital allocation, and operations, * Forecast and mitigate facilities risks to reduce both failures and backlog, * Identify key metrics and target changes to save money and become a best practice institution, and * Tell their story and build constituency for change across campus. See how our strategic solutions, specifically ROPA+ and Building Portfolios, can make the case for change on your campus.

1. University of West Florida
Vanderbilt University
Virginia Commonwealth University
Virginia Department of General
Services
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
Widener University
Williams College
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester State University
Xavier University
Yale University
Return on Physical Assets – ROPA+
Sightlines’ Facilities Intelligence Solution

2. Feel Free to Start a Dialogue with Our Presenter
Enter questions in the box at any time
Enter questions
here at any
point during the
webinar
Presentation slides
and webinar
recording will be
sent to each
attendee following
today’s session
2

3. Today’s Desired Outcome
Why We Do What We Do…
What Industry Challenges are Affecting You?
Sightlines and ROPA+ Overview
Questions and Discussion
3
3

4. Do You Have the Right Tools?
The
average
endowment
The average
building
replacement value
4

5. Your Independent Strategic Facilities Advisor
• Accurately quantify facilities performance
• Separate fact from fiction on mission-critical
issues
• Document trends, provide consistent
measurement, credible benchmarking, predict
future risks and opportunities and track progress
to goals.
Rigorous analytical toolkit to manage your largest asset
5
Optimize capital
investments and
improve operational
effectiveness
Outcome

6. Who We Serve
Robust membership and growing 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
• 8 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
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Texas
• West Virginia
6

7. Challenges in Facilities
Management

8. “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 – 1980
Founder, Pacific Partners Consulting Group
Source: Before the Roof Caves In II: Published with
assistance from APPA and Stanford University
“Before the Roof Caves In”
8

9. 0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
%ofConstructedSpace
Constructed Space 1880-2015
Sightlines Database
Act Your Era – Not Your Age
9
Pre-War
Built before 1951
Durable construction
Older but typically lasts
longer
Post-War
Built between 1951 and
1975
Lower-quality
construction
Already needing more
repairs and renovations
Modern
Built between 1975 and
1990
Quick-flash construction
Low-quality building
components
Complex
Built in 1991 and newer
Technically complex
spaces
Higher-quality, more
expensive to maintain &
repair
Pre-War Post-War Modern Complex
9

10. Today’s Options are More Limited
Number of high
school graduates are
declining in many
states.
Decline in the
availability of
external resources
(state support, debt,
donors).
Tuition increases
have exceeded
inflation since 1985.
New wave of
construction
compounds risk…
10

11. Facilities Backlogs Continue to Rise
Backlog $/GSF
Public Average Private Average
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
$/GSF
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Capital investment not enough to keep backlogs from growing
Avg. CAUBO backlog Avg. CAUBO backlog
11
11

12. How Do You Prevent the Prediction From Becoming Your Reality?
15
12

13. 13
Sightlines Drives a New Conversation
Facilities intelligence toolkit that connects the dots between space,
capital and operating policies
A new conversation around
facilities management…
• Treats physical plant like a core
business
• Uses concepts of endowment
management to contextualize
investment decisions;
• Aligns facilities operations and
capital investment with institutional
mission and finance;
• Uses predictive analysis to focus
on outcomes and not inputs.
• Lets you tell your “facilities story”
as effective as possible.

14. Return on Physical Assets
– ROPA+

15. 15
Three Phases for Continuous Improvement

16. Return on Physical Assets – ROPA+
A Vocabulary for Facilities Measurement, Benchmarking and Analysis
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
16

17. 17
The ROPA+ Process
Disciplined Methodology + Past Performance = Facilities Intelligence
• Sightlines collects and assembles data on campus to
quantify, verify, and qualify 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, Insights
Summit, educational webinars, and ongoing campus
consultation.
Membership

18. Why is Sightlines Different?
18
• As a colleague, not a vendor, Sightlines’ core
business is the strategic assessment of
facilities.
• We do not seek to sell equipment, provide
design services, or outsource operations.
• We do not rely on surveys or self-reported
data. Sightlines’ professionals collect base
data on site alongside your team.
• With our proprietary QVQ (Qualify, Verify,
Qualify) gives you confidence that our
conclusions are based on the most accurate
data in the industry.
• Sightlines presents a compelling story to
“make-the-case” for change to senior
leadership.

19. Sightlines Member Portal
It’s time to get more from your data…24/7/365
19
Member Support
Informed with live
notification to your data
Customized Access
Create customized
dashboard featuring
the metrics most
important to you
Seamlessly benchmark
against 300 member
institutions
Perspective and Context
My Story feature
presents Sightlines key
findings as an easy to
digest narrative
19

20. State of Facilities in Higher Education
2015 Benchmarks, Best Practices & Trends
Sightlines’ annual commentary on the
most important issues facing facilities
professionals…
• Analysis of benchmarks and trends
from over 450 Sightlines clients
• Best practices showing how
institutions have successfully
addressed the root causes of cost
increases.
Download the 2015 State of
Facilities at www.sightlines.com
20
20

21. Insights Summit ’15
The Hyatt Regency Newport, RI
November 9 - 11, 2015
21
21

22. ROPA+ Discovery
22

23. 23
ROPA+ Data Collection Snapshot
Building Information Building Construction Date
Dates of Major Building Renovations
Building Function (Resident Hall, Academic, Athletic, …)
Building Gross Square Footage, Land Acres
Locations Served by Central Systems – Heating, Cooling, Electrical
Deferred Maintenance Deferred Maintenance Assessment (in-house or contracted)
Capital & Operating Project List Completed Projects both Operating and Capital Funds
New Construction Costs
CampusProfile
Staffing Table Department Organizational Chart
Distribution of Trades, Cust. and Grounds Staff by Shop Including Super.
Work Order Report Total Number of Requested and Completed
Completed Work Orders by Shop and Type (Repair, PM, Project, etc.)
Energy Profile Monthly Utility Cost and Consumption by Fuel Type (Gas, Oil, Electric)
Primary Generation Equipment Profile Including Hours of Operation
Operations
Institutional Financial Statement Balance Sheet and Operating Budget
Facilities Operating Budget Operating Budget and Actual by department and line item.
Capital Budget Recurring Capital budget (Plant fund, R&R account) and Capital
Finance

24. Selecting Peer Institutions: Start with Size, Program, Location
Impacts
• Operating Costs
• Energy Consumption
• Capital Needs
• Skill Mix of Staff
Impacts
• Custodial Demands
• Maintenance Demands
• Wear & Tear of Facilities
24
Impacts
• Grounds Staffing Demands
Peer Group #1: Operations Benchmark Group Peer Group #2: Grounds Benchmark Group
There is NO limit to the number of
benchmark groups you can create.
Examples include;
1. Capital & Operations Benchmark Group
2. Energy Benchmark group
3. Grounds Benchmark Group
4. Aspirant Benchmark Group
You must select at least seven institutions to create a peer group
24

25. We Determine…
> Age profile
> Functional profile
> Technical complexity
> Density analysis
Space Profile
What we collect and why…
25
We Collect…
> Square footage
> Construction dates
> Renovation history
> Functional descriptions
> Utility connections
We Answer…
• How does my age profile impact facilities risk?
• How does my space profile affect daily service
operations?
• Do I have the right mix of space to fulfill my
mission?
• Do I have too much or too little square footage?
• Can I afford the space I currently have?
• How do the above findings compare to peers?

26. Where on the Curve Do You Fall?
26
Pre-War
Built before 1951
Durable construction
Older but typically lasts
longer
Post-War
Built from 1951 to 1975
Lower-quality
construction
Already needing more
repairs and renovations
Modern
Built from 1976 to 1990
Quick-flash construction
Low-quality building
components
Complex
Built in 1991 and newer
Technically complex
spaces
Higher-quality, more
expensive to maintain &
repair
Pre-War Post-War Modern Complex
The campus age drives the overall risk profile
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
%ofSpace
Sightlines Database- Construction Age Sightlines Database- Renovation Age CSUCI - Aux
26

27. 20%
12%
13%
34%
45%
25%
22%
29%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Demonstration Peer Average
%ofTotalCampusGSF
Campus Age by Category
Under 10 10 to 25 25 to 50 Over 50
High Cost & Risk Age Profile Compared to Peers
Understanding the Impact of Age on Capital & Operations
High Risk
High Risk
Buildings Under 10
Little work. “Honeymoon” period.
Low Risk
Buildings 10 to 25
Short life-cycle needs; primarily space
renewal.
Medium Risk
Buildings 25 to 50
Major envelope and mechanical life cycles come
due. Functional obsolescence prevalent.
Higher Risk
Buildings over 50
Life cycles of major building components are past due.
Failures are possible. Core modernization cycles are
missed.
Highest risk
27

28. 0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
%Changesince2006
Percent Change in Space and Students vs. Peers
Demonstration GSF Peer Avg's GSF Demonstration Student FTE Peer Student FTE
Adding Space Faster than Students
Lowering Density
28
28

29. More Space & Smaller Buildings = Savings Opportunity
29

30. We Determine…
> Target investment level
> Annual funding to target
> Maintenance deferral rate
> Capital investment profile
Capital Profile
What we collect and why…
30
We Collect…
> Historical project spending
> Deferred maintenance assessment
> R&R project list
> Campus master plan
> New building construction costs
We Answer…
• How much “should” I invest each year?
• Does my past investment align with needs?
• What are conditions on my campus?
• Am I gaining or losing ground with respect to
backlog?
• How do the above findings compare to peers?

31. $39.4
$14.2
$10.6
$17.3
$8.7
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
$40.00
$45.00
3% Replacement Value Life Cycle Need Annual Investment Target
$inMillions
FY14 Annual Investment Target
Envelope/Mechanical Space/Program
Defining an Annual Investment Target
31
Functional obsolescence drives
investment prior to life cycles &
discounts the annual target

32. $0.0
$5.0
$10.0
$15.0
$20.0
$25.0
$30.0
$35.0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Millions
Total Capital Investment vs. Funding Target
Annual Stewardship Annual Investment Target Life Cycle Need
Total Capital Investment vs. Funding Target
Includes only the investment in existing facilities
Increasing Backlog & Risk
32
Increasing Net Asset Value
Lowering Risk Profile

33. $0.0
$5.0
$10.0
$15.0
$20.0
$25.0
$30.0
$35.0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Millions
Total Capital Investment vs. Funding Target
Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Annual Investment Target Life Cycle Need
Total Capital Investment vs. Funding Target
Includes only the investment in existing facilities
Increasing Backlog & Risk
33
Increasing Net Asset Value
Lowering Risk Profile

34. 34
Total Capital Investment Overtime
Demonstration Campus Peer Averages
• This includes stewardship (recurring
funding) & One-Time Capital
Funding (Bonds, Gifts, Grants)

35. Peer Averages
35
Mix of Total Capital Investment Overtime
Demonstration Campus

36. Connecting Annual Stewardship & Asset Reinvestment
36
The more you’ll have to “Catch-Up”The Less you “Keep-Up”
Peer AveragesDemonstration Campus

37. We Determine…
> Daily service/PM costs
> Staffing profile
> Supervisor coverage
> Work order performance
> Customer service profile
> Utility cost and consumption
Operations Profile
What we collect and why…
37
We Collect…
> Facilities budgets
> Staffing and org chart
> Trade distribution
> Work order reporting
> Utility invoices/history
We Answer…
• Is my facilities budget allocated appropriately?
• Is there effective planned or preventative
maintenance?
• Do I have sufficient staffing resources?
• Are my team members supervised effectively?
• Are there savings opportunities?
• How well served does the community feel?
• How do the above findings compare to peers?

38. Facilities Operating Expenditures
38
Demonstration Campus Peer Averages
• Strong PM compared to
peers, but limited capital and
the high risk age profile
continues to increase daily
service operating costs.

39. A Family of Operational Metrics Providing Context
Maintenance Performance
39
All benchmarks are in order of Technical Complexity
• Covering a lot of space given
the age profile and level of
backlog
• Productive team, but
question the sustainability

40. A Family of Operational Metrics Providing Context
Custodial Performance
40
All benchmarks are in order of Density
• Similar coverage,
supervision and materials
resources compare to peers.
• Similar level of output with
cleanliness inspection

41. Work Order Production Analysis
41
Work Orders per FTE Per Year = 460
Peer Average = 660
Difference is 30%
Key Factors: Age, backlog, building size
Daily
Service,
20,000 ,
67%
Prev.
Mntce,
7,000 ,
23%
Other,
3,000 ,
10%
30,000 Work Orders

42. Demonstration Campus
Energy Consumption vs. Peers
42
• Older facilities & new
technically complex space
is driving up energy
consumption
• Older facilities should be
targeted for renovation to
reduce consumption
• Savings should be
redirected back into annual
stewardship
Peer Averages
• Peers strong investment into
infrastructure & building
systems have helps level off
energy consumption.

43. Multiple Perspectives on Quality of Service
Service Process, Campus Inspection, and Customer Survey
0 1 2 3 4 5
Performance…
Work Requests
Organization
Scheduling Process
Centralization
Service Process
0 1 2 3 4 5
Grounds
Exterior
Mechanical Spaces
General…
Cleanliness
Campus Inspection
Customer Survey
13%
50%
32%
5%
Far Exceeds Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Below Expectations
How are requests made?
Who can make requests?
Who schedules the work?
Is there a timeline/completion date given?
Are customers made aware of request
status?
Sightlines completes a building and
grounds inspection rating the general
repair, cleanliness, exterior condition,
and mechanical systems spaces in a 3
hour tour
1.00
3.00
5.00
1.00 3.00 5.00
WorkPerformance
Communication & Process
Excellent
Performance
Poor
Performance
Excellent
Performance
Best practice range
Separate report with all the
results & feedback
43

44. ROPA+ Prediction
44
Mitigating risk and eliminating the unknown
by identifying future capital investment needs
and setting future operational targets

45. $0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
TotalDollars(Millions)
Current Need Renewal Need
Modernization & Infrastructure Projected Investment
Align Investment Capacity with Needs
$65
$172
$250
$155
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
$450
Asset
Reinvestment
Need
Projected
Investment
TotalDollars(Millions)
45
Asset Reinvestment
Need
10 Year Capital Forecast
• While the needs are substantial, there is
enough funding to address the high risk
current needs and the renewal needs over the
next 10 years.
45

46. $12
$185
$220
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 Year
Need
Projected
Investment
Capacity
TotalDollarsThousands(000’s)
Total Capital Need & Capacity
Deferred Maintenance Renewal Needs
Model the Impact of Capital Investments
46
$12
$36
$21
$6
$18
$4
$21
$15
$21
$30
$14
78%
75% 75%
77%
79% 80% 80% 80% 79% 80%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
NetAssetValue(NAV)
TotalDollarsThousands(000’s)
Upcoming Total Capital Need by Year
Deferred Maintenance Renewal Needs Projected Investment Capacity NAV
46

47. $0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Total 10 Year
Need
TotalDollarsThousands(000’s)
Total Capital Need & Capacity
Built-In Equipment
Interiors
Elevators
Plumbing
Envelope
Roofing
Safety/Code
Electrical
HVAC
Highlighting the Investment Risk Profile
47
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
TotalDollarsThousands(000’s)
Upcoming Total Capital Need by Year
High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk
Source of data is from FRRM 2014 annual update
Low Risk
Medium
Risk
High Risk
47

48. Forecasting Future Backlog
Planned renovations will reduce backlog to $113 Million in FY18
48
$44
$29
$76
$27
$20
$36
$76
$20
$17
$51
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
$140
$160
$180
$200
Total Existing
Needs
Building M
Renovation
Building F
Renovation
Building A
Renovation
Estimated
Backlog 2018
3 Year Add'l
Needs
Millions
Estimated Backlog With Planned Renovations
$142/GSF $120/GSF $85/GSF
$93
* Year Add’l Deferred: estimated using FY11-15 average deferral
rate x projected targets FY25-27 (Not ROPA+)
** Future infrastructure needs not included in backlog projection
$113
Modernization Needs

49. Know the COST Before You Build
Sightlines’ new COST Forecaster
49
The only tool that uses your own validated
ROPA+ data to:
• Model the impact of new construction on
ongoing capital and operations
requirements
• Generate multiple building/demolition
scenarios
• Use peer and best practice data to make
sure you are not falling behind
• Proactively make the case the for new
funding to senior leadership BEFORE new
buildings are opened

50. ROPA+ Performance
50
Tracking and measuring success by integrating the
data collected from Discovery and Prediction with
external and internal campus changes, creating the
Sightlines Performance Dashboard

51. Identify Goals & Track Progress
51
Track Performance
Discuss Future
Goals & Areas of
Focus
Set Targets to
Achieve Goals
Identify Best in
Class Institutions
My Campus
Peers
Best in Class
Capital Investment
Operating Budget
Staffing
Energy
Service
Work Order
Space Management
Falling short of
peers and Best in
Class Institutions.
51

52. Facilities Operating Expenditures
52
$-
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
Total Daily Service Costs
Maintenance Custodial Grounds
Daily Service Breakout
Area of
Focus

53. Defining Work Order Frequency Focuses the Analysis
Plotting demand work orders to buildings helps to understand productivity profile
53
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
$- $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000
W.O.Count
Average Cost ($)/ W.O.
High Cost, Low FrequencyLow Cost, Low Frequency
Low Cost, High Frequency
High Cost, High Frequency
(Targeted Buildings)
Savings potential with
capital investment

54. 54
Bringing it All Together

55. The Most Accurate
Data = 360° View of
Finance and Facilities
Analysis - Insight,
Benchmarking and
Best Practices or
“Facilities
Intelligence”
Data-Driven
Decisions Leveraging
Disciplined Data
Analytics
Make-the-case for
Balanced Policies on
Space, Capital and
Operations
Continually Improve
the campus by
aligning with Mission &
Strategy
Sightlines Drives Results
55

56. Upcoming Sightlines Events
Webinar on planned maintenance best practices w/ Penn State & Brown
Plan More, React Less:
Building & Expanding Your
Planned Maintenance
Program
Presented by:
Steve Maruszewski – Associate Vice
President of Physical Plant at Penn State
University
Paul Armas – Director of Maintenance
Operations at Brown University
Kevan Will – Manager of Operations at
Sightlines
Wednesday, April 27 @ 1PM
56

57. Questions and Discussion
57