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