Industries · Government & social infrastructure
Government & social infrastructure
A department manages schools, health facilities and social housing on a maintenance budget that has not moved in four years, with condition surveys of wildly different vintages.
Who this is for
Three people, one budget argument
Portfolio manager
Owns the plan and answers for it. Everything on screen is built to make that week easier.
Facilities condition lead
Holds the budget line and carries the valuation. Cares about defensibility before features.
Deputy secretary, 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
Configured for this industry out of the box: condition on the IIMM_1_5 scale, the SOCIAL weighting profile, budget shown as Annual maintenance + renewal budget, and the instruments it answers to (ASTM_E2018, ISO41001, NCC, AS3003, AS1851) named on every score. All of it is yours to change — the weights are sliders, not our opinion.
The honest bit
6 of 30 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. 20% of this register comes back unranked, with the reason named.
6 of 30 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
Building condition surveys load on their own scale; survey age is carried so a 2019 survey does not read as current.
Service criticality drives consequence — a hospital theatre and a storage shed are not comparable.
Compliance obligations (fire, electrical, patient-area verification) sit as a floor the optimiser cannot defer past.
The budget constrains the discretionary remainder, and the plan says what compliance consumed.
The pack separates statutory maintenance from renewal choice, because they are different conversations.
What you will see
The screens that matter here
Fair questions
What this industry actually asks us
Every facility manager will argue their building is critical.
Which is why criticality is configured once, centrally, and every use of it is logged. The argument moves from the ranking to the criteria, which is where it belongs.
Our surveys are inconsistent between regions.
Load them on their own scales. AIPP converts each and reports confidence separately, rather than pooling incomparable grades into one average.
Can it handle component-level building assets?
To the depth of the component accounting engine, yes — roof, services, structure with their own lives. Not to element-quantity depth.
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.