Total cost of ownership district guidelines (revised)

Contents

TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP DISTRICT GUIDELINES 2

(revised) 2

Dr. Sadiq B. Ikharo, 2

Vice Chancellor for General Services 2

8-17-16 2

DRAFT 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

TCO GUIDELINES’ PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS 4

Dr. Sadiq B. Ikharo, Vice Chancellor of General Services (DGS) 4

Rosemary Vazquez, Executive Assistant, (DGS) 4

Bruce Shapiro, Director of Facilities Operations (DGS/M&O) 4

Osafran Okundaye, Interim Director of Facilities Operations (DGS/M&O) 4

Charles Neal, Director of Energy & Environmental Sustainability (DGS) 4

Jamille Teer, Senior Secretary (DGS) 4

Atheria Smith, Director of Facilities Planning and Development (Capital Projects) 4

Stephanie Gillen, IT Consultant 4

Antoine Mehouelley, Interim Director of Technology Services 4

Dr. Annette Dambrosio, Accreditation Consultant 4

Members of the PBIM District Facilities Committee (DFC) 4

The following TCO Guidelines were developed in consultation with each of the four Colleges, reviewed by the PBIM District Facilities Committee (DFC) on May 2, 2016,and reviewed by the PBC on May 27, 2016. These TCO Guidelines are a revision of the 2015 PCCD TCO Action Plan. 4

NOTE: 4

The May 27, 2016 Draft TCO Guidelines were revised and refined throughout Summer 2016. The final draft version will be reviewed at the August 2016 Flex Day. The document will be distributed to DFC in Fall 2016 for adoption. 4

4. TCO ASSUMPTION CALCULATIONS FOR PCCD 8

Various Stages of Ownership

8

New Acquisition 9

9

Facilities Life-Cycle Stages (50-years or Longer) 9

Facility Life Cycle Stage (Example - $200 M (TCO) 9

9

5. PCCD MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS’ FACILITIES CONDITION INDEX (FCI) 10

A. Peralta Community College District Facility Condition Index 10

6. ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATE ANNUAL LEVEL OF FUNDING FOR MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL OUTLAY RENEWAL

11

TCO Funding Projections for 5 years include: 12

7. ESTABLISHING TCO STANDARDS 15

PCCD must determine what standards are acceptable for maintaining equipment, buildings, grounds, and custodial performance. PCCD applies the Association of Physical Plant Administrators (APPA) Standards. APPA Standards address the following: Equipment & Building Standards, Grounds Standards, and Custodial Standards. (SEE APPENDIX FOR APPA Standards). 15

11. RECOMMENDATION TO ESTABLISH AN IN-HOUSE TCO TASK FORCE TO IMPLEMENT A FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT (FCA)
16

Note: The District is currently engaged with the Community College League of California (CCLC) to conduct an updated FCA in August 2016. 16

Upon receipt of the CCLC FCA recommendations, the District Facilities Committee (DFC) should consider establishing an in-house Task Force to implement the new Facilities Condition Assessment (FCA) beginning in Fall 2016 semester. This DFC Task Force will: 16

a. Define the Level of Service (APPA definition) that we are striving to achieve throughout the District. 17

b. Develop a clear (and ongoing) funding vehicle to address the evolving District Maintenance backlog. 17

c. With the funds provided, develop a Facilities’ implementation schedule and identify the resources (both human and monetary) to ensure the greatest ROI (Return on Investment). 17

d. Accountability should reflect the District’s priorities and ongoing commitment to the TCO. 17

e. TCO information should be broadly distributed to the District and the Colleges. 17

13. APPENDIX 18

IV. Proposed FCA Task Force Responsibilities, August 2016, Dr. Sadiq, B. Ikharo, Vice Chancellor

18

LEVEL 1--- Showpiece Facility

19

LEVEL 2 – Comprehensive Stewardship Criteria

19

LEVEL 3 – Managed Care Criteria 19

LEVEL 4 – Reactive Management Criteria
20

Grounds – Level Factors 21

Appendix III 22

Custodial Standards

22

Source: APPA Standards 22

Level 1: Hospital Environment Standard): 22

Level 2: Ordinary Tidiness

22

Level 3: Casual Inattention

22

Level 4: Moderate Dinginess 23

Appendix IV 24

PROPOSED FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT (FCA) TASK FORCE RESPONSIBILITIES 24

Source: Dr. Sadiq B. Ikharo, Vice Chancellor for General Services, August, 2016, 24

The DTC Task Force will work in Collaboration with General Services to oversee the following tasks: 24

1.Prioritize Equipment Maintenance (according to prioritization criteria:) 24

2.Estimate Cost of Maintenance, Upgrade, or Replacement

24

The Process 37

Total Cost of Ownership 38

IT: Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) 39

Checklist 39

Sample Cost Analysis 39

Evaluation Rubric 41

IT Standards 42

This Report provides observations and recommendations to assist the Peralta Community College District administration in managing the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Educational Technology, selecting the best-fit technology and systems, as well as aligning its technology with the Institutional mission, goals and institutional objectives, to include the equitable distribution of resources for the four Colleges.

The Process

Peralta Community College District understands that its Software Licensing, Hardware, Services, and Maintenance requires upgrading, continued maintenance, and support.

All major projects, IT projects that are outside of a regular maintenance schedule or under an existing contract, should be organized into a structure that will allow for thorough evaluation and a decision based upon predetermined criteria. Individuals from across the organization will participate and provide input toward the final decision.

The following criteria should be used for selecting a vendor for all major projects.

• 
  Best-Fit Functionality
  
• 
  Optimum Implementation Strategy
  
• 
  Total Cost of Ownership
  

The process has been designed to help PCCD focus on its priority needs and functional requirements.

All major selections should be organized into three levels: the Steering Committee, the Functional Evaluation Team, and the Chancellor and Board of Trustees. Each group has a defined role in the process.

The Functional Evaluation Team is responsible for evaluating the viability and functionality of each vendor finalists. This Team will design demonstration scenarios and specific functional questions to be answered by the vendor. The Functional Evaluation Team will provide to the Steering Committee an analysis of the functional fit from each vendor. The Steering Committee will review the analysis and evaluate the implementation strategies as well as the total cost of ownership. It is the Steering Committee’s charge to provide a final recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees.

The graphic below illustrates the project organization.

The Steering Committee should consist of members of the District Technology Committee. Approximately 15 individuals should be actively engaged and participate on the Functional Evaluation Team. These individuals will represent a cross-section of the organization including Faculty, Students, Finance, Human Resources, Academics, Enrollment Management, Continuing Education, Information Technology and Financial Aid. The stakeholders will be selected by