1
Contract Maintenance ModelsTrends and Options
Presented by:Walter RafinDTZ
2
Presentation Roadmap
Facilities Managementversus
Facilities Maintenance
Maintenance Contract Model
Options
Summary
3
Facilities Management versus Facilities Maintenance
Facilities
Managem
ent
Facilities
Maintenance
versus
Facilities Management integrates all organisational processes, people and workplace. Includes property | space management, infrastructure, support services, administration and asset management
Facilities Maintenance sustains building and asset performance to design intent, to increase reliability, reduce equipment degradation, and sustain energy efficiency, whilst maintaining mandatory compliance requirements.
4
Preventative Maintenance
Usually fixed PM fee
Normally includes some corrective elements (e.g. coil cleaning)
Not usually inclusive of repair or reactive works
Asset owner takes on almost all risk
Results in too little or too much maintenance – unclear requirements
Budgeting & cost control difficult
Too Little
Too much
5
Inspection (or Reactive) Based‘Fly-by’ inspections
Usually fixed inspection fee
Excludes any corrective elements (e.g. cleaning filters)
Reporting of issues only
Not inclusive of repair or reactive works
Usually least expensive option
Least effective
Least effective?
6
End Results (or Reliability)
Not yet widely used
All or part risk transfer
Risk based on defined end result requirement (e.g. comfort)
Payment based on results
Usually tied to Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)
Difficult to define parametersEN
D
7
Comprehensive
Fixed Fee all inclusive – budget certainty
Full risk transfer to contractor
Usually subject to condition assessment and latent conditions
Excludes capital replacement, refurbishment and/or rehabilitation
Contractor manages risk via rigorous PM or not enough PM
RISK Labour
Parts
Significant administration savings
8
Semi-Comprehensive
Inclusive of all labour only
Normally excludes parts and materials
Fixed labour fee
2nd most expensive model
Works best for large sites or portfolios
Budgeting can be difficult
Less risk transferred to contractor
Labouronly
9
Repair Work Limit (RWL)
Research shows for M.E.F services: • 66% <$1000• 20% rehab | refurb | capex & chargeable• 14% >$1000 & chargeable
Most reactive calls minor
Capped risk at predetermined/agreed threshold or ‘RWL’
Usually subject to condition assessment and latent conditions
Significant administration savings
Labour
Parts
MaterialsRepair W
ork Limit
10
Summary
Choose wisely and do your homework
Consider:
- Economic conditions and what you can afford
- Technical advances
- Your portfolio condition
- Your risk profile
- Contract flexibility for change
- Performance management and reporting framework
Keep
the end resultin mind