Skip to main content

2026_MiAPPA Innovating for Impact Presentation by Wightman

Page 1


2026 MiAPPA SUMMER CONFERENCE MISSION CRITICAL

Innovating for Impact: Advancing Educational Facilities Through Infrastructure and Operational Excellence

Definitions

What is the difference between a NEEDS ASSESSMENT and a FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT?

From Reactive Needs to Strategic Facility Planning

Beyond the Clipboard: A Comprehensive Approach to Facility Planning

Needs Assessment

• Identify systems that are broken

• Needs assessments

• Walk the building

• Note deficiencies

• Determine cost of correction

• Done with a clipboard

• Provides a “single point” in time assessment

• Not getting “forward look”

Facility Condition Assessment

+ NEEDS – SHOULD BE A FACILITY

CONDITION ASSESSMENT

• EVALUATION OF ALL BUILDING AND SITE SYSTEMS

• LOOK AHEAD 10 – 20 YEARS

• BASED ON LIFE CYCLE

• COST – INDEXED FOR LOCATION AND INCREASES

Facility Condition Assessment Team

Import building & systems lists Integrate CMMS data

Field assessments with Prior Assessments

Industry data: BOMA, Uniformat

Funding and Condition

1.Roof $123,543

2.Lighting $75,000

3.Sewer $135,000 4.Access $83,000

Industry benchmark data – RS Means

Report / Measure

Prioritize/ Budget

1.Roof $123,543

2.Lighting $75,000

3.Sewer $135,000

4.Access $83,000

Collection

+ ASSESSMENT TEAM

• ARCHITECT(S)

• ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

• MECHANICAL ENGINEER

• CIVIL ENGINEERS/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

+ ASSESS ALL BUILDING AND SITE COMPONENTS

• QUANTITY

• PHOTOGRAPHS

• CONDITION

• LIFE-CYCLE YEARS REMAINING

+ QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW

+ DATABASE COMMITMENT

Collection

Facility Assessments: Consistent & Objective

FACILITY ASSESSMENTS: CONSISTENT AND OBJECTIVE

Enrichment

+ BOMA

• BUILDING OWNERS & MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

• LIFE-CYCLE OF EACH SYSTEM + RSMEANS

• INDUSTRY STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COST DATA

• ADJUSTED FOR REGIONAL COSTS

+ PROVIDES INFORMATION ON WHEN A SYSTEM NEEDS ATTENTION AND THE PROBABLE COST

Analysis

+ PRESENT DRAFT DATA FOR REVIEW

+ COACH ON EXPLORING “WHAT’S IN THE DATA?”

+ COACH ON TURNING DATA INTO A CAPITAL PLAN

+ FINAL PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS (POF)

Analysis

Dashboard

Dashboard

Work Plan Dashboard

Work Plan Dashboard

Facility Master Plan

Definitions

How can research and good planning save first-time costs and operational expenditures?

Planning Beyond First Cost

How Research and Strategy Reduce Long-Term Operational Expenses

Case Study

Using Research and Fire Modeling to Reduce First Cost and Long-Term Operational Expenses

• “No Mechanical Smoke Evacuation Required.”

• “Performance-Based Design Approach.”

Performance-Based Fire Modeling Strategy

Research and Simulation Replaced Assumptions

Visibility Study Animation at 6’-0” Research-Based Decisions Improved Safety AND Reduced Cost

Visibility Study Animation – 3D

Research-Based Decisions Improved Safety AND Reduced Cost

ASET vs. RSET

Proving Occupants Could Safely Egress Without Mechanical Smoke Evacuation

Key Definitions

• RSET = Required Safe Egress Time

• ASET = Available Safe Egress Time

Mission-Critical Planning Creates Long-Term Value

Research-Based Decisions Improved Safety AND Reduced Cost

Key Outcomes

✓ Maintained occupant safety

✓ Met NFPA 101 communicating space requirements

✓ Eliminated unnecessary mechanical smoke evacuation

✓ Reduced operational complexity

✓ Improved long-term maintainability

✓ Preserved architectural openness and student experience

Operational Simplicity = Long-Term Savings

The Best System May Be the One You Never Install

Comparison

Avoided Systems

Avoided Long-Term Burden

Roof smoke exhaust fans Maintenance

Smoke control dampers Testing

Dedicated controls Commissioning

Emergency power upgrades

Energy consumption

Smoke control sequences Failure risk

Firefighter override panels Lifecycle replacement

Definitions

How can the Owner get the most VALUE for the money they spend on capital projects and maintenance?

Maximizing Long-Term Value

Strategic Planning for Capital Investment and Maintenance

what are you buying

Balancing Expectations

Research-Based Decisions Increase Value

Key Project Components

money/budget

time/schedule

quality/design

Traditional Project Cost Control

Cost to Change

Design Value Matrix

Cost to Change

Typical Life Cycle Costs: 40 Years

Research-Based Decisions Increase Value

✓Construction Cost

✓Financing

✓Capital Expenditures

✓Operating Costs

✓

Typical Life Cycle Costs: 40 Years

Research-Based Decisions Increase Value

✓Construction Cost

✓Operating Costs

✓Personnel Costs

✓Students

Construction Operating Costs Personnel

✓Source: Joseph Romm, Lean and Clean Management, Kodansha International, 1994

Energy Star Target Finder

Target-Based Decisions Increase Value

Sample Operational Cost Goal: Utilities maximizing investment &

minimizing

life cycle costs

Annual Utility Costs Savings

New, High-performing, and ENERGY STAR Certified Building vs. 1960’s Building

ENERGY STAR certified buildings use about 35% less energy than typical peer buildings.

Definitions

How can educational facilities increase student ENGAGEMENT, improve recruitment and retention, and strengthen institutional identity?

Visioning & Stakeholder Engagement

Using Collaborative Visioning and Stakeholder Engagement to Create Mission-Critical Learning Environments

KRESA Visioning & Stakeholder Engagement

Lessons from the KRESA 4-Day Collaborative Design Process

Facility as a Statement of Value

Value of the New CTE Center:

• Signals value and relevance through strong curb appeal that attracts students, families, educators, and employers

• Flexible, future-ready spaces that adapt to evolving industries, equipment, and instructional models

• Strategically located to support efficient transportation, industry partnerships, and realworld work-based learning along the I-94 corridor

• A shared community asset, providing access and use during non-peak school hours

Designed to build 21st-century skills—for students and the broader community.

Delegate Leadership – Build Empathy

Visioning & Stakeholder Engagement - Choice

Recommendation:

Based on a group vote from the visioning and stakeholder engagement workshops, the recommendation is to select Visioning Option No. 3, “Discovery Trail,” is the preferred option to further develop during conceptual design.

New Career Center | Concept Design

New Career Connect Center | Concept Design

New Career Connect Center | Concept Design

First Floor Plan

New Career Connect Center | Concept Design

Second Floor Plan

Gound Breaking

Bridging Communities

Threshold Experience

Welcome

KRESA Opens, May 2025

KRESA Opens, May 2025

Opportunities!

KRESA CCC

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook