The document lists universities and colleges. Sightlines is introduced as a leading provider of facilities intelligence solutions to higher education. They have over 360 members and offices in several states. Sightlines helps members make data-driven decisions about facilities through analytical tools, benchmarking, and strategic planning support. The presentation then focuses on how Sightlines worked with Wake Forest University to analyze their facilities needs and priorities through tools like ROPA+ analysis and an integrated facilities plan. This helped Wake Forest better understand their deferred maintenance backlog, funding gaps, and develop a 10-year capital investment strategy.

1. University of Nebraska Medical Center
University of Nebraska Omaha
University of New Brunswick
University of New Hampshire
University of New Haven
University of New Mexico
University of North Texas
University of Northern Iowa
University of Notre Dame
University of Oregon
University of Pennsylvania
University of Redlands
University of Rhode Island
University of Rochester
University of San Diego
University of San Francisco
University of Southern Maine
University of Southern Mississippi
University of St. Thomas
University of Tennessee Health Science Center
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
University of Texas at Dallas
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia
University of Vermont
Vanderbilt University
Virginia Commonwealth University
Virginia Department of General Services
Wagner College
Wake Forest University
Washburn University
Washington University in St. Louis
Wellesley College
Wesleyan University
West Chester University
West Liberty University
West Virginia Health Science Center
West Virginia Institute of Technology
West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine
West Virginia State University
West Virginia University
Western Connecticut State University
Western Oregon University
Westfield State University
Wheaton College
Widener University
Focusing a Campus Investment Strategy
Presenters: John Shenette and Dan Starr

2. About Sightlines
Leading provider of facilities intelligence solutions to higher education industry
2
• Sightlines Key Facts
• Founded in 2000
• 360+ ROPA+ Members
• 3 Offices in CT, PA and OR
• Our Facilities Intelligence Solutions deliver:
• Toolkit for data-driven decision making
• Analytical rigor and consistent methodology
• Reliable peer and best practice benchmarking
• Common vocabulary and common platform
• Strategic story-telling platform for Senior Leadership
• Membership, Database, Experience and Client
Performance = engine behind our solutions, insight,
growth and retention

3. Sightlines Membership & Database Engine
Growing membership and database provides experience and perspective
Partners to the Nation’s Leading Institutions:
• 14 of the Top 20 Colleges*
• 15 of the Top 20 Universities*
• 34 Flagship State Universities
• 13 of the 14 Big 10 Institutions
• 9 of the 12 Ivy Plus Institutions
• 8 of 13 Selective Liberal Arts Colleges
Serving state systems in:
• Alaska
• California
• Connecticut
• Hawaii
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Missouri
• New Hampshire
• New Jersey
• Pennsylvania
• Texas
• West Virginia
3

4. Presenter Snapshot
Dan Starr
4
• Project Lead at Sightlines
• Has worked with Wake Forest since 2014,
on their ROPA+ Analysis and Integrated
Facilities Plan
• Has experience working on over 35
different higher education campuses
• Facilities Analytics and Benchmarking firm
• 450 colleges and universities are Sightlines
clients.
• We have clients in 40 states, the District of
Columbia and four Canadian provinces

5. Presenter Snapshot
John Shenette
5
• Associate Vice President for Facilities and
Campus Services
• At Wake Forest since 2014, previously at
Smith College in Massachusetts
• Nearly three decades in facilities
management
• University relocated to Winston-Salem in 1956
• Over 4,800 undergraduate and 2,700 graduate
students
• Over 3.7 million gross square feet of building space
at Reynolda campus

6. Why Sightlines?
Wake Forest reached out to Sightlines as a way to...
6
Reason
#1
•Validate feelings with third
party data
Reason
#2
Reason
#3
•Clear, concise deliverables
to communicate with
campus leaders
•Consistent
vocabulary allows
for cross-university
comparisons

7. Timeline of Engagement
7
Summer 2014
John contacts Sightlines
to perform ROPA+
Analysis
Fall 2014
ROPA+ findings reveal a
need for a more focused and
comprehensive capital plan
Spring 2015
Sightlines
Integrated Facilities
Plan process begins
Fall 2015
Sightlines IFP identifies
backlog of deferred needs
as well as 10-years of
modernization and repairs
Spring 2014
John Shenette joins the team
at Wake Forest

8. 8
Telling the Facilities Story
• Sightlines collects and assembles data on campus to
quantify, verify, and qualify (QVQ) facility performance.Measure
• Through the benchmarking process, institutions have the
capability to create custom comparisons that help them
understand context and performance.
Benchmark
• Sightlines synthesizes an institution's verified data to
provide expert insight and perspective and develop
strategic directions for change.
Analyze &
Interpret
• Sightlines continues to support each campus through our
Member Portal, national thought leadership, educational
webinars, and ongoing campus consultation.
Membership

9. A Vocabulary for Measurement
The Return on Physical Assets – ROPASM
9
Asset Value Change
The annual
investment needed
to ensure buildings
will properly
perform and reach
their useful life
“Keep-Up Costs”
Annual
Stewardship
The accumulation
of repair and
modernization
needs and the
definition of
resource capacity
to correct them
“Catch-Up Costs”
Asset
Reinvestment
The effectiveness
of the facilities
operating budget,
staffing,
supervision, and
energy
management
Operational
Effectiveness
The measure of
service process,
the maintenance
quality of space
and systems, and
the customers
opinion of service
delivery
Service
Operations Success

10. Wake Forest is Underspending on Capital...
10
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
$16.0
$18.0
$20.0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Millions
Spending into Existing Space vs. Targets
Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Target Need
Annual Investment Target

11. ...And Overspending on Operations
11
$-
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
$8.00
$9.00
$10.00
A B C D E F WFU G H I
$/GSF
Operating Actuals vs Peers
Daily Service PM Utilities
Average: $7.26/GSF
Peer Institutions
Boston College
Brown University
Davidson College
Duke University
Princeton University
University of Chicago
University of Notre Dame
Vanderbilt University
Washington University in St. Louis

12. ROPA+ Findings for Wake Forest
12
Insufficient Capital Investment
Growing Deferred Maintenance
Higher Operating Costs
Impacted Service Levels
1
2
3
4

13. Today: No Integration in the Process
Rift created between the technical assessment and the project selection is not easily bridged
13
Technical
Assessment
Project
Selection
Traditional Facilities Assessment
Fails to harness
operating knowledge
Does not tie to
mission, strategy or
master plans
Ignores financial
capacity
Too “engineered” to
communicate to
leadership
No accounting for
modernization

14. Tomorrow: Full Plan Integration
Why the Integrated Facilities Plan over other analyses?
14
Full Inventory
of Projects Apply
Building Portfolio
& Timeframe
Apply
Investment
Criteria &
Timeframe
Multi-Year
Project
Plan
Geographic, Program,
Transitional, & Years
Reliability, Asset Preservation,
Program, Economic Operations,
Safety/Code & Years
Full Inventory of
Projects
Electrical,
Plumbing, HVAC,
Mechanical,
Exterior, Interior,
Safety…
How Do
You Target
Projects
?
Building Portfolio Process
CurrentChallengeProposedSolution
Electrical,
Plumbing, HVAC,
Mechanical,
Exterior, Interior,
Safety…
Pick
Projects

15. Process Overview
15
Data Collection
• Campus walk-through and inventory key building components,
systems, sub-systems, building characteristics, etc.
Inventory Generation
• Supervisor Interviews, internal and external studies and capital
planning integrated together into one inventory of needs
Project Planning Codification
• Applying consistent vocabulary, timeframe and pricing to each
project in the inventory
Data Qualification
• Review projects, timeframe and pricing for accuracy

16. The Scenario at Wake Forest
Immediate needs were primarily life cycle needs in mechanical systems
16
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
TotalNeed,$inmillions
10-Year Identified Needs by System and
Timeframe
A (1-3 years) B (4-7 years) C (8-10 years)
19%
58%
12%
11%
Backlog Life Cycle
Modernization Infrastructure
10-Year Identified needs by
Project Category

17. Identifying Risk and Targeting Projects
17
Reliability
Backlog
“A” Timeframe
Life Cycle Needs
10-Year Identified Needs All identified needs for the next 10 years (2016-2025).
Systems and components that are past due, or will hit end-of-
life expectancy within the next 3 years (2016-2018).
Systems and components that are past due.
Projects that, if not addressed, will displace programs.
Highest risk needs.
$397M
$260M
$85M
$9.4M
KeyFocus

18. Building Portfolios
Grouping buildings in order to assess risk and focus investment
18
WFU Reynolda
Campus
$397M
Building Needs
$335M
Building Renovation
$102M
9 Buildings
533k GSF
Acad/Admin
$146M
29 Buildings
1.6M GSF
Residence Halls
$74M
23 Buildings
654k GSF
Student Life
$13M
5 Buildings
121k GSF
Grounds &
Infrastructure
$62M
• Not all buildings are created equal.
• Campuses are too complex to manage
by a single strategy.
• Break down the included buildings into
“building portfolios” that are reflective of
the program’s mission and strategic
directions.
• Guide investment to portfolios in a
multi-year strategy, as opposed to “pay-
as-you-go” project by project
investment.

19. Focusing an Investment Plan
19
What is it that we know about
our needs now?
What is it that we can do
within reason?
The total needs are too high
to address completely.
$400M over the next 10
years is not realistic.
True need of $150M over the
next 10 years. An additional
$102M will be addressed
through planned renovations.
Where will we be 10 years
from now?
Will have addressed core
needs and problem
buildings. Therefore, Wake
Forest will be in a more
proactive mode.

20. Findings for Wake Forest
20
Started the process of
creating a 10-year
facilities plan
Delivered various
methods for prioritizing
projects within the list
Reinforced findings
from the ROPA+
Analysis
Identified all facilities
needs for Wake Forest
over the next 10 years

21. Reception of IFP
21
What audience
heard the
message?
What did they
take away from
the meeting?
How did we get
buy-in across
campus?
• Senior Administration
• Board of Trustees
• Department Heads
• Facilities Organization
• Understanding of the need
• Strategic approach
• It’s a campus effort
• Results and investment over time
• On going process
• Involved campus partners, Provost, Deans, RLH,
Athletics
• Informational presentations to Senior Administration
• Trustee committee presentations, Audit and
Compliance, Administration