Federally owned capital assets include some 500,000 buildings and similar facilities worldwide acquired during 200 years of government operations. Government facilities are used to defend the national interest; conduct foreign policy; house historic, cultural and educational artifacts; pursue research; and provide services to the American public. These buildings and structures project an image of American government at home and abroad, contribute to the architectural and socioeconomic fabric of their communities, and support the organizational and individual performance of federal employees conducting the business of government . Federal facilities embody significant investments and resources and therefore constitute a portfolio of public assets. At least 30 separate agencies manage these facilities. As stewards of this public investment, federal facilities program managers face a number of challenges. In the 1990s Congress and the Executive Branch took a number of initiatives to improve capital asset decision making in the federal government. These include enacting the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 and a series of federal financial accounting standards; developing the Capital Programming Guide (1997); and appointing the President's Commission to Study Capital Budgeting (1997). Senior and mid-level agency officials are now seeking ways to implement these initiatives efficiently and effectively. The Federal Facilities Council (FFC) sponsored a conference entitled "Capital Asset Management: Tools and Strategies For Decision Making" to highlight strategies and ideas for capital asset management so that federal and other public agencies can improve decision making for facilities investment. Held at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on September 13, 2000, the conference featured speakers from the public, non-profit, and private sectors. Capital Asset Management: Tools and Strategies For Decision Making: Conference Proceedings summarizes the presentations made at that conference. The speakers focused on trends and best practices in capital budgeting; capital asset decision making processes in three federal agencies; building a case for capital reinvestment; and new tools for federal agencies. Online resources referred to by the speakers are listed in Appendix A. Appendix B contains the speakers' biographies.
More than 30 federal departments and agencies with a wide range of missions and programs manage large inventories of facilities, also called portfolios. These portfolios range in size from a few hundred to more than a hundred thousand individual structures, buildings, and their supporting infrastructure. They are diverse in terms of facility types, mix of types, and geographic dispersal. For federal senior executives, facilities portfolio-related decisions revolve around the allocation of resources (staff, funding, time) for acquisition, renovation, operation, repair, and disposition of facilities. To make informed decisions, senior executives require information that will allow them to answer such questions as: What facilities do we have? What condition are they in? What facilities are needed to support the organization's missions? This study lays out a framework for developing and evaluating trends in facilities portfolio conditions, investments, and costs and identifies a set of key indicators that can be used to track performance over time. Some of the indicators are currently in use in some federal agencies; others will need to be developed.
Available and emerging information technologies hold the promise of enhancing the quality of federal workplaces; supporting worker productivity; improving capital asset management, programming, and decision making; reducing project delivery time; and changing how buildings are constructed and operated. Federal agencies, however, face a significant challenge in identifying technologies that will justify the investment of time, dollars, and resources, will have the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances over the longer term, and will not be obsolete before they are deployed. To begin to address these challenges, the Federal Facilities Council (FFC) sponsored a symposium entitled "Emerging Information Technologies for Facilities Owners: Research and Practical Applications" at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on October 19-20, 2000.
Although most federal facilities projects are successfully completed (i.e., they reasonably meet the agency's requirements and expectations), the perception is that development of the scope of work for design for these projects is challenging and in some cases poorly performed. Based on this perception, a study was commissioned by the Federal Facilities Council (FFC) of the National Research Council to identify the elements that should be included in a scope of work for design to help ensure that the resulting facility is one that supports the fulfillment of a federal agency's program or mission. Its objectives also included identifying key practices for developing effective scopes of work for design involving new construction or major renovation projects and identifying key practices for matching the scope of work with the acquisition strategy, given a range of project delivery systems and contract methods.
The federal government, like private corporations and other organizations, acquires buildings and other facilities to support specific functions and missions and the general conduct of its business. The federal government is, in fact, the nation's largest owner of buildings and spends more than $20 billion per year for facility design and construction. Adding Value to the Facility Acquisition Processidentifies a range of best practices and technologies that can be used by federal agencies and other owners to provide adequate management and oversight of design reviews throughout the facility acquisition process.
The design, construction, operation, and retrofit of buildings is evolving in response to ever-increasing knowledge about the impact of indoor environments on people and the impact of buildings on the environment. Research has shown that the quality of indoor environments can affect the health, safety, and productivity of the people who occupy them. Buildings are also resource intensive, accounting for 40 percent of primary energy use in the United States, 12 percent of water consumption, and 60 percent of all non-industrial waste. The processes for producing electricity at power plants and delivering it for use in buildings account for 40 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. federal government manages approximately 429,000 buildings of many types with a total square footage of 3.34 billion worldwide, of which about 80 percent is owned space. More than 30 individual departments and agencies are responsible for managing these buildings. The characteristics of each agency's portfolio of facilities are determined by its mission and its programs. In 2010, GSA's Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings asked the National Academies to appoint an ad hoc committee of experts to conduct a public workshop and prepare a report that identified strategies and approaches for achieving a range of objectives associated with high-performance green federal buildings. Achieving High-Performance Federal Facilities identifies examples of important initiatives taking place and available resources. The report explores how these examples could be used to help make sustainability the preferred choice at all levels of decision making. Achieving High-Performance Federal Facilities can serve as a valuable guide federal agencies with differing missions, types of facilities, and operating procedures.
The deteriorating condition of federal facilities poses economic, safety, operational, and environmental risks to the federal government, to the achievement of the missions of federal agencies, and to the achievement of public policy goals. Primary factors underlying this deterioration are the age of federal facilities-about half are at least 50 years old-and decades of inadequate investment for their maintenance and repair. These issues are not new and there are no quick fixes. However, the current operating environment provides both the impetus and the opportunity to place investments in federal facilities' maintenance and repair on a new, more sustainable course for the 21st Century. Despite the magnitude of investments, funding for the maintenance and repair of federal facilities has been inadequate for many years, and myriad projects have been deferred. Predicting Outcomes of Investments in Maintenance and Repair of Federal Facilities identifies processes and practices for transforming the current portfolio of federal facilities into one that is more economically, physically, and environmentally sustainable. This report addresses ways to predict or quantify the outcomes that can be expected from a given level of maintenance and repair investments in federal facilities or facilities' systems, and what strategies, measures, and data should be in place to determine the actual outcomes of facilities maintenance and repair investments.
Federally owned capital assets include some 500,000 buildings and similar facilities worldwide acquired during 200 years of government operations. Government facilities are used to defend the national interest; conduct foreign policy; house historic, cultural and educational artifacts; pursue research; and provide services to the American public. These buildings and structures project an image of American government at home and abroad, contribute to the architectural and socioeconomic fabric of their communities, and support the organizational and individual performance of federal employees conducting the business of government . Federal facilities embody significant investments and resources and therefore constitute a portfolio of public assets. At least 30 separate agencies manage these facilities. As stewards of this public investment, federal facilities program managers face a number of challenges. In the 1990s Congress and the Executive Branch took a number of initiatives to improve capital asset decision making in the federal government. These include enacting the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 and a series of federal financial accounting standards; developing the Capital Programming Guide (1997); and appointing the President's Commission to Study Capital Budgeting (1997). Senior and mid-level agency officials are now seeking ways to implement these initiatives efficiently and effectively. The Federal Facilities Council (FFC) sponsored a conference entitled "Capital Asset Management: Tools and Strategies For Decision Making" to highlight strategies and ideas for capital asset management so that federal and other public agencies can improve decision making for facilities investment. Held at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on September 13, 2000, the conference featured speakers from the public, non-profit, and private sectors. Capital Asset Management: Tools and Strategies For Decision Making: Conference Proceedings summarizes the presentations made at that conference. The speakers focused on trends and best practices in capital budgeting; capital asset decision making processes in three federal agencies; building a case for capital reinvestment; and new tools for federal agencies. Online resources referred to by the speakers are listed in Appendix A. Appendix B contains the speakers' biographies.
In the late 1990s, several of the sponsor agencies of the Federal Facilities Council began developing and implementing initiatives and policies related to sustainable development. Guidance related to life-cycle costing and value engineering was recognized as being supportive of sustainable development, in particular when used in the conceptual planning and design phases of acquisition, where decisions are made that substantially effect the ultimate performance of a building over its life cycle. However, specific concerns were raised that when federal agencies apply value engineering in the final stages of design or during construction in response to cost overruns, design features that support sustainable development may be eliminated. The primary objective of this study, therefore, was to develop a framework to show how federal agencies can use value engineering and life-cycle costing to support sustainable development for federal facilities and meet the objectives of Executive Order 13123.
In 1986, the FFC requested that the NRC appoint a committee to examine the field and propose ways by which the POE process could be improved to better serve public and private sector organizations. The resulting report, Post-Occupancy Evaluation Practices in the Building Process: Opportunities for Improvement, proposed a broader view of POEs-from being simply the end phase of a building project to being an integral part of the entire building process. The authoring committee recommended a series of actions related to policy, procedures, and innovative technologies and techniques to achieve that broader view. In 2000, the FFC funded a second study to look at the state of the practice of POEs and lessons-learned programs among federal agencies and in private, public, and academic organizations both here and abroad. The sponsor agencies specifically wanted to determine whether and how information gathered during POE processes could be used to help inform decisions made in the programming, budgeting, design, construction, and operation phases of facility acquisition in a useful and timely way. To complete this study, the FFC commissioned a set of papers by recognized experts in this field, conducted a survey of selected federal agencies with POE programs, and held a forum at the National Academy of Sciences on March 13, 2001, to address these issues. This report is the result of those efforts.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.