Presented by Paul Armas, Director of Maintenance Operations, Brown University, Steve Maruszewski, Associate Vice President for Physical Plant, The Pennsylvania State University, and Kevan Will, Account Manager, Sightlines. "We cannot afford to be in the reactive maintenance business!" - Steve Maruszewski, Penn State University You understand that planned maintenance is the best means of prolonging the life of your building systems. But after you've replaced the filters and changed belts, how does your campus take the next step towards proactively addressing building needs? How do you establish a path towards reliability focused maintenance by changing the culture among your facilities organization? How do you put a plan in place that allows you to reap the cost and time savings of planned maintenance in the face of affordability pressures? Steve Maruszewski, Assistant Vice President for Physical Plant at The Pennsylvania State University, and Paul Armas, Director of Maintenance Operations at Brown University, will join Kevan Will of Sightlines to discuss: The implemented and projected planned maintenance strategies that have placed them among the leaders in proactive investment within the Sightlines database. The importance of securing "buy-in" from both management and staff by developing a strategic plan that focuses on increasing value, reducing waste, and respecting people. How to establish a cultural shift from valuing the extreme to valuing the routine.

1. Wheaton College (MA)
Whitworth University
Widener University
Wilkes University
Williams College
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester State College
Wright State University
Xavier University
Yeshiva University
Youngstown State University
Plan More, React Less
Building and Expanding Your Planned
Maintenance Program
Sightlines Webinar w/ Steve Maruszewski of Penn
State University & Paul Armas of Brown University
April 27, 2016

2. Today’s Presenters
> Kevan Will; Account Manager, Sightlines
> 9+ years of tenure at Sightlines
> Has worked with over 100 campuses in 27 states
> Sightlines Operational Lead for The Pennsylvania State University’s University Park Campus & 20
Commonwealth Campuses
> Graduated from Gettysburg College with a BA in Management
> Paul Armas; Director of Maintenance Operations, Brown University
> 6 years of tenure at Brown University
> Proudest Accomplishments @ Brown:
> Cultivated a culture in Facilities Management of Continuous Improvement
> Aligning facilities operations with capital renewal investments and identifying operational inefficiencies that
improve the effectiveness of service initiatives
> Steve Maruszewski; Associate Vice President for Physical Plant, The Pennsylvania State University
> 20 years of tenure at The Pennsylvania State University
> Proudest Accomplishments @ Penn State:
> Sustainability Efforts including Co-chairing the Development of Penn State’s Sustainability Strategic Plan
and achieving APPA’s national Award for Sustainability in Higher Education.
> Leading a physical plant staff of incredibly talented individuals
2

3. Introduction to Sightlines and our database
Brown’s story – Paul will share Brown’s PM
implementation/execution strategy and anticipated
outcomes
PSU’s story – Steve will discuss PSU’s PM strategy
centered on reliability
Executive takeaways and concluding thoughts
Questions & comments
Agenda
3

4. Feel Free to Start a Dialogue with Our Presenters
Enter questions in the box at any time; questions will be answered at the end of the presentation
Enter questions
here at any
point during the
webinar
Presentation slides
and webinar
recording will be
sent to each
attendee following
today’s session
4
Questions will be answered at the end of the presentation. If we run out of time, any
remaining questions will be answered after the presentation via follow-up emails.

5. Introduction

6. Who We Serve
Robust membership and growing 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
• 8 of the 12 Ivy Plus Institutions
• 8 of 13 Selective Liberal Arts Colleges
Serving state systems in:
• Alaska
• California
• Florida
• Hawaii
• Maine
• Massachusetts
• Minnesota
• Missouri
• New Hampshire
• New Jersey
• Oregon
• Pennsylvania
• Texas
6

7. Sightlines Drives a New Conversation
Facilities intelligence toolkit that connects the dots between space, capital, and operating policies
A new conversation around
facilities management…
• Treats physical plant like a core
business
• Uses concepts of endowment
management to contextualize
investment decisions;
• Aligns facilities operations and
capital investment with institutional
mission and finance;
• Uses predictive analysis to focus
on outcomes and not inputs.
• Lets you tell your “facilities story”
as effective as possible.
7

8. Preventive
Maintenance Strategy,
Implementation, &
Anticipated Outcomes

9. Brown Campus Profile
> Located in Providence, RI
> 9,100 Students
> 6.8M GSF
> 236 Buildings
> 149 Maintained Acres
> Sightlines Member since 2002
9

10. > Building Portfolios Grouped by Type:
> Academic Research
> Academic Non-Research
> Biology & Medicine
> Residence Halls
> Athletics
> Student Life
> Admin / Support
> Auxiliary Housing
Brown Campus Profile (cont.)
Maintenance Operations Staffing
Management & Support Staff: 18
Trades Staff: 105
10

11. Additional Facilities Intelligence Compiled
Campus is older
than peers and
becoming more
complex
19% 17%
6%
26%
23%
22%
52%
36%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Brown Peer Average
%ofTotalCampusGSF
Campus Age by Category
Under 10 10 to 25 25 to 50 Over 50 Significant needs in building
systems occur over the next
ten years
$0.00
$2.00
$4.00
$6.00
$8.00
$10.00
$12.00
$/GSF
Total Operating Expenses
Daily Service PM Utilities Peer Average
Lower operating expenses, but
performing more work with in-house staff
than peers
12

12. > Campus NAV 81.65%
> Deferred maintenance need identified at
$462M
> Infrastructure renewal needs $60M annually to
keep backlog from growing
Facts Learned from 2010 Assessment
“Brown needed to increase funding for recurring
capital and needed to focus on Preventive
Maintenance within its operating budget”
11

13. Statistics at “The Beginning”
2011 (Pre-Strategy)
No. PM+CM completed 14,000
No. RM completed 38,000
% PM+CM labor 25%
% RM labor 75%
In house PM+CM labor $1.5M
Supplies PM+CM $580K
Contract services $1.6M
Dedicated PM staff 0
No. of equipment 5,000
13

14. Goals:
> Prolong the useful life of equipment
> Lower operating costs associated with
maintaining equipment
> Reduce utility costs and energy
> Reduce unplanned system interruptions
PM Strategy Overview
14

15. • Co-created a strategy with 133 FM staff and customers using
3 lean principles
• Focus on increasing value, reducing waste, and respecting
people
• Assessed current PM situation including work practices &
systems
• Assessed data systems & sample buildings
• Created building and asset prioritization method
• Generated ideas, assess cost vs. value
• Designed a new PM Program
• Created an implementation approach, including phasing plan,
staffing, and budget
What We Did: The Process
15

16. PM Strategy by Portfolio
Proposed PM Level of Service
Maint. Levels* Description* PM
Critical Bldg.
Score
Brown Bldg.
Portfolio
Level 1:
Showpiece
Facility
All
recommended
PM is
scheduled and
performed
100% >75
Central Heat
Plant
Academic
Research
Level 2:
Comprehensive
Stewardship
85% of
recommended
PM is
scheduled and
performed
85% 50-74
Academic Non-
Research
Student Life
Level 3:
Managed Care
50-60% of
recommended
PM is
scheduled and
performed
50%-60% 20-49
Admin/Support
Athletics
Dormitory
Level 4:
Reactive
Management
25% or less of
recommended
PM is
scheduled and
performed
<25% <20
Auxiliary
Housing
Portfolio
Critical
Bldg.
Score
Avg.
Acad. Research 77
Student Life 63
Acad. Non-
Research
51
Admin/Support 33
Athletics 23
Dormitory 21
Aux. Housing 8
16
* APPA service levels and descriptions

17. Brown Values & Desired Outcomes
Identified by Customers and Stakeholders
Customer
Satisfaction!
• Better Planning &
Organization
• Balanced Workflow &
Prioritization
• Improved Communication &
Transparency
17

18. Planning
Design &
Construction
Gather Data
&
Equipment
Info
Plan PM
Needs
Define PM
Task &
Frequency
Develop
CM WO
Schedule &
Assign Work
Obtain
Materials/
Parts
Do Work
Document
in Famis
Closing &
QA/QC
Organization
Mgmt
Problems 9 13 14 15 8 12 27 58 7 14 5
Ideas 19 8 17 15 2 20 33 55 8 11 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Value Stream Mapping of
Preventive & Corrective Maintenance Work Order Processes
Learning to See Problems Together
Identifying Opportunities & Ideas
18

19. 19

20. > Used to identify waste in maintenance execution
process to help fund the desired PM program
> Identified 57,000 hours of recoverable labor costs
through operational efficiency improvement in these
areas:
Lean Process
Improvement Area Estimated Hours Gained
Asset & Equipment Information 12,528
Standard Work Execution 12,161
PM Strategic & Responsive Scheduling 9,305
Tools/Parts/Materials/Inventory Management 14,568
Management & Communication 8,439
20

21. PM Budgeting Process
100%
PM Budget
Estimate
Brown University
100% Maintenance
Level
Gross
Square feet
Total
PM Hours
Total
PM Cost
Total
PM Material
Cost
Total
Contract
Services PM
Cost
Total
PM Costs
Cost/GSFT
Academic - Research 643,393 28,755 1,293,989$ 212,877$ 176,435$ 1,683,301$ 2.62
Biomed 694,073 32,701 1,471,545$ 218,311$ 194,572$ 1,884,428$ 2.72
Academic - Non-Research 1,563,481 56,763 2,554,328$ 292,554$ 465,918$ 3,312,800$ 2.12
Student Life 279,275 8,858 398,620$ 91,438$ 100,882$ 590,939$ 2.12
Admin / Support 683,117 14,871 669,198$ 104,205$ 270,700$ 1,044,103$ 1.53
Athletics 440,923 14,406 648,269$ 128,073$ 69,217$ 845,559$ 1.92
Dormitory 1,685,533 29,328 1,319,752$ 176,151$ 372,394$ 1,868,297$ 1.11
Aux. Housing 219,208 6,126 275,676$ 61,184$ 87,441$ 424,301$ 1.94
Central Heating Plant 4,500,000 8,000 360,000$ 24,000$ 160,000$ 544,000$ 0.12
Total 6,209,003 199,808 8,991,377 1,308,791 1,897,559 12,197,727 1.96
$12,197,727199,808
21

22. Target PM Budget Selected
Brown University
Recommended PM
Program
Gross
Square feet
Future
PM Hours
Future
PM Cost
Future
PM Material
Cost
Future
Contract
Services
PM Cost
Total
PM Costs Cost/GSFT
Academic - Research 643,393 19,266 866,973$ 170,302$ 176,435$ 1,213,709$ 1.89
BioMed 694,073 20,941 942,345$ 208,647$ 185,960$ 1,336,952$ 1.93
Academic - Non Research 1,563,481 32,326 1,454,690$ 291,764$ 465,918$ 2,212,372$ 1.42
Student Life 279,275 5,045 227,014$ 93,042$ 100,882$ 420,937$ 1.51
Admin / Support 683,117 5,978 269,018$ 88,296$ 270,700$ 628,013$ 0.92
Athletics 440,923 4,826 217,170$ 108,277$ 69,217$ 394,664$ 0.90
Dormitory 1,685,533 9,825 442,117$ 113,481$ 297,915$ 853,513$ 0.51
Aux. Housing 219,208 959 43,155$ 37,932$ 71,091$ 152,178$ 0.69
Central Heating Plant 4,500,000 8,000 360,000$ 24,000$ 160,000$ 544,000$ 0.12
Total 6,209,003 107,166 $ 4,822,481 $ 1,135,742 $ 1,798,117 $ 7,756,339 1.25$7,756,339107,166
22

23. > Seed Money (One time funding)
> Built up a PM reserve over several years of $580K
> New Space Incremental O&M funding (Annual)
> Reoccurring new and renovated space funding
$400K targeted toward Preventive Maintenance
> Recapture of 57,000 hours of labor efficiencies
> PM activities equivalent to 27 FTE’s or $2.5M of PM
PM Program Funding
23

24. PM Strategy Implementation
2011
› PM Strategy Development
› Lean Process
2012
› PM Strategy Finalized
› Staffing Plan Defined
› Training Program Established
› CMMS Redesign – Phase 1
2013
› CMMS Redesign – Phase 2
› In-House Equipment Data
Collection Pilot
› PM Management Team Created
› PM Staff & Supervisor Additions
2014
› 3rd Party Equipment Data
Collection Pilot
› PM Metrics Design
› Visual Aids Established
› Mobile Application Design
2015
› Visual Aids Pilot
› Mobile Application Pilot
› Master Scheduling
Implementation
› Campus Wide Equipment
Data Collection – Phase 1
24
2016
› Visual Aids Deployed
› Mobile iPad’s Deployed
› Campus Wide Equipment
Data Collection – Phase 2
› PM Metric Deployed
› QA/QC Pilot & Deployed

25. Current & Future State
2011
(Pre-Strategy)
2015
(Year 4)
< 2019
(Target)
No. PM+CM completed 14,000 32,000 45,000
No. RM completed 38,000 30,000 20,000
% PM+CM labor 25% 52% > 70%
% RM labor 75% 48% < 30%
In house PM+CM labor $1.5M $4.11M $4.85M
Supplies PM+CM $580K $740K $1.15M
Contract services $1.6M $2.0M $1.8M
Dedicated PM staff 0 30 40
No. of equipment 5,000 16,000 >20,000
25

26. The Team In Action!
26

27. Reliability Centered
Maintenance

28. Penn State Campus Profile
> University Park (UP) Campus
Located in State College, PA
> 45,000 Students at UP
> 95,000 Students at all locations
> Sightlines Member since 2002
28

29. Penn State Campus Profile All Locations
24 distinct locations in Pennsylvania including a major hospital. Each
location is subject to local governance and local support structure.
University Park is almost it’s own city with 2 power plants, it’s own water
supply and filtration plant, sewage treatment plant, 4 substations, etc.
Type UoM University
Park
Campuses Total incl. Hershey
& all other
locations
Land Acres 7,343 3,042 22,539
Paved Roads Miles 35 28 63
Paved Walkways Miles 60 21 71
# of Buildings Each 940 478 1710
Building Area GSF (Millions) 24.6 8.1 32.1
394 Man. & Sup. Staff; 957 TS Employees; 101 Temporary TS Employees
29

30. > Facility Needs Index (FCNI) Goals:
> Icons (Old Main) 0.15
> Student Space (classrooms, commons, etc.) 0.15
> Education and General Space 0.25
> Infrastructure (parking, roadways, etc.) 0.25
> Utilities 0.15
> Current FCNI’s
0.01-0.05 Excellent, new 18%
0.06-0.15 Good 28%
0.16-0.30 Fair 35%
0.31-0.40 Below average 11%
0.41-0.59 Poor, gut/renovation 6%
0.60-and above Replace 2%
> Current Deferred Renewal Backlog – $1.7B
Penn State Facility Conditions
30

31. Penn State Age Profile: UP vs. CWC
19% 16%
13%
27%
29%
42%
39%
15%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
UP CWC
%ofTotalCampusGSF
Renovation Age by Category
Less Than 10 10-25 25-50 Over 50
Buildings Under 10
Little work.
“Honeymoon” period.
Low Risk
Buildings 10 to 25
Short life-cycle needs;
primarily space renewal.
Medium Risk
Buildings 25 to 50
Major envelope and mechanical
life cycles come due.
Higher Risk
Buildings over 50
Life cycles of major building
components are past due. Failures are
possible.
Highest risk
68%
57%
31

32. Penn State Capital Investment Against Target
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Total$inMillions
Annual Stewardship Projection to ‘Keep
Up’ Campus in Current Condition
Asset Reinvestment Projection to Significantly
Reduce Backlog and Modernize Buildings
Blue Bars – Annual Stewardship Capital Investment (Includes MM & SFF Funding)
Yellow Bars – Capital Asset Reinvestment (Includes UFR, DGS, PFI, Gifts)
Blue Line – Annual Stewardship Capital projection to keep up campus in current condition
Yellow Line – Capital Asset Reinvestment Projection to reduce backlog
32

33. Penn State Loss in Buying Power
-60.0%
-50.0%
-40.0%
-30.0%
-20.0%
-10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
Budget Reduction
Industry Inflation
Rate
Cumulative Impact
04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15
53% over last
ten years
uncompounded
33

34. Summary of the Challenges
• The challenges are significant and they aren’t going away soon.
• National pressure on affordability = increased pressure on
funding sources.
• Permanent stewardship funding is getting harder to acquire.
• Capital funding doesn’t fully address the gap because much of
it goes to non-priority deferred issues.
• Our annual buying power continues to shrink.
• We need to maximize the use of existing funding to extend the
life of our systems and to improve overall reliability.
We cannot afford to be in the reactive
maintenance business!!!
34

35. Establish a path toward Reliability focused
Maintenance through Planned, Predictive and
Preventive maintenance
Change the Culture to Focus on Reliability!!
The Answer
35

36. Change the Culture
Congratulations you oiled 50
bearing sets today!!!!!!
Best way to start a
cultural shift is to
start by changing
what your reward.
36

37. Why Make this Shift?
Cost for Ineffective Preventive and Predictive Maintenance
for 2 – 40,000 CFM Lab Make-up Air Handlers:
• 2 months down time for one
• 6 months down time for other
• Over $500k direct cost
• Over $1m lost research opportunity
37

38. Potential Failures – Where to Detect Them?
Cost to repair is
only a portion of
the total cost due
to the failure
38

39. ‘Run to Failure’ Unacceptable in Institutional Settings
While run to
failure is a viable
strategy, it is
rarely acceptable
in Institutional
settings.
39

40. Operating Actuals: Higher than Average Daily Service Costs
$3.73
$3.13 $3.23
$3.49
$4.31
$3.43
$4.42
$6.10
$5.48
$7.03
$4.03 $3.90
$-
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
$8.00
A B C D E F G Penn
State
H I J K
$/GSF
Facilities Operating Budget Actuals
Actual Daily Service $/GSF Peer Avg
*Institutions ordered by backlog
40

41. Maintenance Performance
Penn State operates with more maintenance staff than most peers
PSU Peers Database
General Repair/
Impression
4.29 3.74 3.84
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
GSF/FTE
Maintenance Staffing Coverage
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
FTE/Supervisor
Maintenance Supervision
*Ordered by tech rating
41

42. Planned Maintenance Investment
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
PMSpending
Planned Maintenance Spending
$0.00
$0.10
$0.20
$0.30
$0.40
$0.50
$0.60
$0.70
$0.80
$0.90
A
B
C
D
E
F
PennState
G
H
I
J
K
$/GSF
PM spending $/GSF
Against Facilities Peers
*Institutions ordered by tech rating
42

43. Re-Organized to increase focus on preventive
and predictive maintenance programs.
This allows for easier expansion of one area
with simultaneous reduction in another area
Re-organizing Around Preventive and Predictive Maintenance
Manager
Maintenance
Programs
Electrical System
Integrity Programs
Electrical System
Integrity Programs
Electrical System
Integrity Programs
HVAC PM
Hydronic Treatment
Programs
Elevator Program
Maintenance
Maintenance
Programs And
Services
Sr. Manager
Building Services
Area Services 1
Area Services 2
Area Services 3
Area Services 4
Area Services 5
Area Services 6
Plumbing & Metal Fab
HVAC
General Services
Electrical & Electronics
2nd Shift Trades
Weekend Shift Trades
43

44. Institute Numerous Preventive and Predictive Programs
> Predictive:
> Vibration Analysis
> Thermographic Analysis
> Eddy-Current Testing
> Preventive:
> Custodial Equipment PM
> PMs on all snow removal, landscape, and construction equipment, and all vehicles
> Mechanical room walk thru’s
> Exteriors: Doors and Roofing PMs
> Water softener PMs
> Research Equipment PMs (stills, autoclaves, acid digesters, environmental chambers, etc)
> HV Equipment (filter, belts, lube) & Refrigeration PMs (DX units, process chilled water, etc.)
> Electrical Integrity, EMGs, UPS
> Water Treatment
> Fire extinguishers and Sprinkler Systems, Fire and Smoke Alarm Systems
> Elevator PMs
> Animal Waterers and various farm systems like milking systems, manure removal
> Street Light PMs
> Group Relamping
> Ultrasonic Steam Trap Program
44

45. > Upgrading our CMMS and aligning our facilities condition analysis to
focus on Assets. This will allow for more informed decision making
> Strengthening the planning and scheduling process
> Adding planners that focus on each of the major disciplines
> Plans will result in job kitting to ensure techs have materials at the site
when they are ready to perform the work.
Strengthen the Planning
45

46. > Developing new metrics to support the effort and linking metrics directly
to the university and physical plant strategic plans
Develop New Metrics
High-level Objective Child Objective [ 1 ]
Grandchild Objective
Work Execution Management Schedule Optimization Schedule Compliance
MRO_Inventory Management Demand Management Stock-out Management
Work Execution Management Planning Efficiency Planned 2 Unplanned
MRO_Inventory Management Demand Management Service Level Management
Work Execution Management Proactive Work Optimization Proactive Maintenance Compliance
Work Execution Management Proactive Work Optimization Proactive Work Past-due
Reliability Management Asset Reliability Critical Failures
Work Execution Management Planning Efficiency Planning Accuracy
Reliability Management Maintenance Strategy Maintenance Mix
Work Execution Management Schedule Optimization Schedule Break-in Ratio
Work Execution Management Schedule Optimization Backlog Management
MRO_Inventory Management Demand Management PR aging
MRO_Inventory Management Inventory Movement Inventory Aging
MRO_Inventory Management Inventory Movement Inventory Turnover
Reliability Management Asset Reliability M T B F
Reliability Management Asset Reliability M T T R
Reliability Management Maintenance Strategy PM PdM Yield
Reliability Management Asset Reliability Rework
MRO_Inventory Management Inventory Movement Material Transfer Invoicing (MTI)
MRO_Inventory Management Inventory Value Growth Critical Spares Growth
MRO_Inventory Management Inventory Value Growth Non-Critical Spare Growth
MRO_Inventory Management Demand Management Kitting Efficiency
MRO_Inventory Management Warehouse Controls Inventory Adjustments
46

47. Performed Baseline Wrench Study
Metrics for each Supervisor
Key Activity Type Description
1
Working
Time spent physically performing tasks
2
Travel
Time spent walking/driving to locations
3
Matrl Rec
Time spent gathering materials (i.e.
parts, tools, etc.)
4
Meetings
Time spent in meetings on or off the
jobsite
5
Instruction
Time spent in a learning environment on
or off site in which training takes place
6
Clearance Delay
Time delay due to permission or access
to be granted to perform the work
7
Interference
Time elapsed due to conflicts between
two or more entities on one site (i.e. CM
crew must work around electrical crew)
8
Idle
Downtime due to miscellaneous
occurrences such as mini-breaks, waiting
for glue to dry, etc.
9 Rest Room Time elapsed for rest room visit
10
Break
Time elapsed during break (may include
travel time)
11
Total Time Obs
This is the total time in which an
observation takes place (multiply by the
number of persons observed) (see in
GDM Wrench Time Algorithm)
12
1 Tech Only Time
Time in which only one technician is
working while the other is idle
Activities Studied
47

48. Expand capacity of staff by capturing $3-6m/yr
in wrench time
Reduce reactive maintenance to less than 20%
Reduce operating cost/SF
Significantly improve overall reliability
Increase overall customer satisfaction
Expected Outcome
48

49. Executive Takeaways

50. Paul Armas – Brown University
• It’s critical to have a strategic plan.
• ‘Buy-in’ by both management and the staff is critical. They need to be part
of the process in developing the solutions.
• Metrics must be established and monitored to ensure that goals are met.
Steve Maruszewski – The Pennsylvania State University
• Funding will always be constrained and we need to make the best use of
what we have.
• Planning and Prevention are the key to maximizing the value of available
funding.
• A cultural shift from valuing the extreme to valuing the routine is necessary
for success.
Executive Takeaways
50

51. Questions?
Please remember to complete the survey after the webinar ends.
Thank you!

52. Stay Current with Latest Trends and Best Practices
Let us keep you current, visit our Insights page
If you haven’t downloaded
our report, The State of
Facilities in Higher
Education: 2015
Benchmarks, Best
Practices & Trends, please
go to sightlines.com to
download your copy today.
Sign up for our monthly
newsletter
Read our blog, explore our
content
52