As part of our on-going series on the different types of facility condition datasets, this week we will focus on providing an overview of Client-Informed Models (CIMs).
The main difference between a Building-Type Model (BTM) that we discussed last week and a CIM, is that the model is based on feedback from the owner/manager of the building(s).
For the most basic of CIMs, a spreadsheet is created listing all the potential elements that could be present within a building. The Asset/Facility Manager is asked to confirm if it is present/absent from the building, and an approximate date of installation. We utilized this approach during to Ontario School Renewal Initiative back in 2002. The spreadsheet was called the Asset Review Tool (we called them “ART” files). Each school district was given an ART file for each building and they had to complete them and return them to our team. We used the data to build a lifecycle model based on the client data.
Having worked with 72 different school boards, we saw a wide range of quality of ART files that we returned. Some boards took their time and put in the effort to build ART files that were representative of the real-world assets. However, others rushed through them and the quality of the model was terrible.
A more complex CIM involves the preparation of a BTM, which is then sent to the Facility/Asset Manager for review and revision. This way the CIM is an advanced version of a BTM, where knowledgeable staff have the ability to validate the model and adjust the dates of installation based on their knowledge and experience.
Compared to a BTM, a CIM (if the Facility/Asset Managers put in the proper effort), can provide a more realistic view of the future capital renewal needs forecast. However, in some cases where there are not staff with a long history and deep institutional knowledge, the CIM may actually provide “worse” or less realistic data for a portfolio. If you and your team are all new to your institution, a CIM may not be the best approach for you.
The biggest challenge with a CIM is the amount of time that it takes our clients to put it together. Currently, almost everyone that I talk to is understaffed and is having trouble finding good employees. Dedicating a significant amount of time to building out the data models can be hard to prioritize when there are urgent and important tasks that need to be done just to “keep the trains running on time”.
We have seen lots of clients put in the required effort to develop a valid and useful CIM. The most important aspect of the decision however, is understanding the effort that it will take and making sure you set aside the ample time for your knowledgeable staff to do it right.