Industries · Local government / council

Local government / council

A council has eleven asset classes, one asset officer, a long-term financial plan due, and an auditor who asked last year how the renewal figure was derived. Nobody could fully answer.

Who this is for

Three people, one budget argument

👷

Asset officer

Owns the plan and answers for it. Everything on screen is built to make that week easier.

💷

Finance manager

Holds the budget line and carries the valuation. Cares about defensibility before features.

🏛️

Director of infrastructure

Signs, and is the one asked the awkward question in public. Needs one page, not a tour.

Asset classes

What AIPP scores in this industry

Roads Footpaths Stormwater Pipes Pipe Potable Facilities Parks OpenSpace Playgrounds Bridges
📐

Configured for this industry out of the box: condition on the IIMM_1_5 scale, the LOCAL_GOV weighting profile, budget shown as LTFP 10-year renewal allocation, and the instruments it answers to (IIMM, ISO55001, INFRA_ASSETS_REPORT, AS4685) named on every score. All of it is yours to change — the weights are sliders, not our opinion.

The honest bit

9 of 48 assets will not score

That is the demo register for this industry, and the gaps are deliberate. AIPP refuses to rank an asset the evidence does not support — it will not apply a curve, a zero or a middle grade to a thing nobody has inspected. 19% of this register comes back unranked, with the reason named.

9 of 48 assets carry NO condition evidence and NO age. That is deliberate. A demo register where everything scores teaches a prospect nothing about what happens to the two-thirds of their own register that will not — and it is exactly where most tools quietly invent a zero. Open the demo on these.

How it runs

From export to defensible programme

01

One spreadsheet per class loads through the same wizard; the classes without condition data are named rather than averaged.

02

Every class scores on its own model — a playground does not get a road's risk logic.

03

One ranking across all eleven classes, which is the thing a council genuinely cannot do by hand.

04

The LTFP allocation is applied and the renewal gap is reported as a number with its working.

05

The Report on Infrastructure Assets exports, with the provenance the auditor asked for.

What you will see

The screens that matter here

Eleven classes, one listThis is the screen a council cannot produce in Excel: a footpath, a culvert and a playground ranked against each other on the same basis. Not because they are alike — because your budget makes you choose between them.
The renewal gap, with workingHere is the number for your financial plan, and here is how it was built. Last year your auditor asked. This screen is the answer.
What you have not measuredAnd this is what is not behind it. These classes have no data-quality rules configured, so they are marked unassessed rather than scored 100%. A confident green on something nobody checked is worse than an honest blank.
Change a weight, see the costYour council wants safety weighted higher. Move it. The ranking changes here, the programme changes there, and the change is written to the Decision Ledger with your name on it.
The packAnd that is the report, exportable, with the deferred list included rather than quietly dropped.

Fair questions

What this industry actually asks us

We are a small council. Is this too much tool?

The accelerator is the answer to that: it scores your readiness from your own rows and does the steps a tool honestly can, then names what only you can do. If it says you have four classes with no condition data, that is your project plan.

Our data is a mess.

Then the first output is a map of the mess with a value attached, which is usually the business case for fixing it. Nothing is scored on data you do not have.

Who else uses it?

Be sceptical of that answer from any vendor. Better test: load your own worst class and see whether the tool tells you the truth about it in twenty minutes.

Run it on your own worst class

Bring one export — the class with the missing condition data and the costs from 2019. If AIPP tells you the truth about it in twenty minutes, that is worth a conversation. If it scores everything and looks clean, tell us so.