|Home About Blog Contact|
|Facility Condition Index (FCI)
performance indicator (KPI)
which is used to objectively quantify and evaluate the current condition (ie., physical
health) of a facility
and to make two types of benchmark comparisons on the relative condition of that
one facility with:
It is important to note that FCI is a measure of condition relative to the reproduction cost of the building. FCI is not an absolute statement of the size of the backlog of catch-up work. A large and complex facility, with a high reproduction cost, requires a larger backlog of deferred maintenance to raise the FCI than a smaller/simpler building.
Purpose of the FCI
The principal value of an FCI rating, particularly for the owners and operators of a single facility or a portfolio of facilities, can be identified as:
The FCI Condition Scale
In accordance with the original formula developed in 1990, the relative measure of the condition of the facility (or facilities) is usually organized into a four-tiered condition scale, as follows:
Unfortunately these thresholds and their KPIs have been misinterpreted and misrepresented over the last few decades as a result of adjustments to the formula by different software vendors and engineering firms.
The formula contains a numerator that is divided into a denominator to return a percentage KPI. [See formula on the right of the screen].
The FCI formula can be summarized as the ratio of all the deferred maintenance (the numerator) divided into the Current Replacement Cost of the entire facility (the denominator).
These other classes of reinvestment should more appropriate be considered in other measures, such as the Extended Facility Condition Index (EFCI).
There are alternative methods for establishing the denominator of the formula.
Variations on the FCI Methodology
In order to accommodate regional differences, budget constraints, portfolio attributes and methodological alternatives, there are some variations on the standard FCI, including the following:
Since FCI is a snapshot of the current extent of catch-up, it is necessary to extend the analysis to include other variables, such as facility priority ranking and facility age. There are three common types of correlations utilized in the industry.
1. FCI and Mission Criticality (Prioritization)
The Condition-Priority Matrix plots the relationship between the relative condition and the relative priority of assets or facilities. within a portfolio. Listed below are the four quadrants in the analytic matrix.
2. FCI and Facility Age
The Condition-Age Matrix plots the relationship between the relative condition and the relative age of facilities utilizing 5- stage facility lifecycle model as follows:
3. FCI and Energy Efficiency
The Condition-Energy Matrix plots the relationship between condition and energy efficiency of the facilities.
4. FCI and Facility Operatings Standards
Different facilities are governed on different operating standards depending on their mission criticality and budget constraints.
Analytics and KPIs
Listed below are some of the analytics and KPIs that can returned once the FCI has been established for one or more facilities in a portfolio.
Financial Modeling with FCI
Reinvestment is a reconciliation of the expenditure forecasts ("How much money will we need?) and the funding level ("How much money will we have?"). Sensitivity analysis asks the following two questions:
A. Linear Funding Models
This method asks the question: “If the owners fund at level x, what will be the resultant FCI each year?”
B. Lumpy Funding Models
This method of funding asks the question: "What should our funding be each year to ensure that the FCI remains at a certain level."
Listed below are some of the advantages and merits of the facility condition index (FC) as an asset management tool:
Management of the data from the FCI can be administered through the following mechanisms and techniques.
Fig. The three formulas and key performance indicators (KPI) used to measure and evaluate the physical health of a facility.
Fig. Examples of deferred maintenance items that are included in the numerator of the FCI formula. These are considered reinvestment category #1: catch-up costs.
Fig. Illustration of how the Facility Condition Index (FCI) is generated for facilities to develop comparative analysis and then plotted as a Key Peformance Indicator (KPI).
Fig. FCI compared across multiple facilities within a single portfolio with the objective of making resource allocation decisions in the context of limited resources.
Fig. Average FCIs for different departments within a single portfolio.
Fig. A Portfolio Condition-Priority Matrix (PCPM) with scatter plot distribution of a portfolio of facilities indicating the current state of affairs.
Fig. A backlog reduction strategy for some facilities presented on the Condition-Priority matrix
Fig. A sample condition-age matrix for a large portfolio of facilities from different departments (identified by colour coding). FCI along the horizontal axis and mission criticality along the vertical axis.
Fig. 3D matrix to cross reference the Facility Condition Index (FCI) with the Mission-Dependency Index (MDI) and backlog quantum.
Fig. Workflow to illustrate how the FCI is used to generate linear funding models and lumpy models as part of a sensitivity analysis.
Fig. Sensitivity analysis testing the Projected FCI levels on two linear funding models.
Fig. The composition of the deferred maintenance (catch-up costs) can be analyzed in a variety of ways, including distribution by system and distribution by priority.
Fig. Example of a five-year backlog reduction strategy across a portfolio of buildings.
Fig. Three alternative backlog reduction scenarios (FCI), phased over a 5-year period.
Fig. Relationship between FCI and funding levels across five facility operating standards.
Fig. The FCI spectrum and the five operating standards.
Fig. Geographical (GIS) representation of the Facility condition index (FCI) across a portfolio.
Fig. Backlog quantum of the FCI (left) and identification of facilities in good condition (right).
Fig. Correlation of the FCI with EFCI to determine whether to reinvestment in a facility or redevelop instead.
Fig. Condition drift of certain facilities represented on a scatter plot with the Facility Condition Index (FCI) on the horizontal axis and the Mission Dependency Index (MDI) on the vertical axis.
Fig. I. Care is using destructive testing (and other creative means) to reveal the hidden stuff going on in the iceberg under the surface (latent defects, concealed conditions, lagging indicators, legacy problems, root causes, back-of-house, interval censoring, covert failures, and potential failures).
|(c) Copyright Asset Insights, 2000-2013, All Rights Reserved "Insight, foresight and oversight of assets"||