Presentation Transcript

1. Targeted Asset Reviews: An Innovative Approach to Federal Real Property Asset Management

   Meaghan DoviakRealty Specialist General Services Administration: Property Utilization & Disposal May 2012
2. Value to the Customer Value: Promotes retention & disposal decisions Example: Public and negotiated sales that result from TARs, i.e. Miami Richmond Heights Value: Asset Utilization Recommendations Example: Determination of under-utilization -NRCS, Des Moines, Iowa: NRCS turned in an ROE to GSA -We also recommended them to complete a Phase 1 Environmental Study
3. Overview -Executive Order 13327, signed February 4, 2004, to promote the efficient and economical use of Federal Real Property Assets as part of the President’s Asset Management Initiative requires Federal landholding agencies to develop and implement real property asset management plans. -GSA’s Office of Real Property Disposal is responsible for promoting the effective utilization of Federal Real Property Assets as well as the disposal of real property no longer mission critical to Federal agencies.
4. Background GSA’s Office of Real Property Disposal introduced the Targeted Asset Review concept in 2002 as an alternative to Executive Order 12512 Real Property Utilization Surveys and as part of a customer oriented approach to help agencies develop and implement sound asset management and redeployment strategies. The program was pilot tested with the Coast Guard’s Civil Engineering Unit in Miami. Since inception GSA has done TARs for 14 agencies.
5. Purpose Targeted Asset Reviews are real estate utilization studies designed to assist agencies with real property asset management by: -Increasing their knowledge of individual assets -Understanding the role of each asset in supporting agency mission objectives -Examining current and future utilization alternatives -Due diligence review which includes collecting and organizing title, environmental, historic and cultural information -Identifying real estate and community issues affecting the property
6. Costs -$4,591,537 since 2002 -209 TARs completed -Average cost of TAR is $21,969 -Over $1.8 million completed on a reimbursable basis
7. Results -Over $5,000,000 proceeds to the Federal Building Fund -Over $20,000,000 in proceeds to other Landholding Agencies -Additional Outcomes
8. Program Results -Public Sales -Negotiated Sales -PBCs -Relocations -Reports of Excess -Real Property Exchanges
9. How we decide to do a TAR -Will property be excessed in the near future? -Is the property complex? Are the property records in disarray? -Are we trying to establish a new relationship with the customer? -What are the customer’s goals? -Does the FY budget support the projected cost? Should the TAR be done on a reimbursable basis?
10. Program Management -Performance based contract fully competed for maximum price leverage -Contract and budget managed in CO -All task orders are firm fixed price -BPA with 5 contractors -Complete collaboration with PZ regions on all aspects of TARs -Does PZ region have capability to do TAR in house?
11. Success! -Miami, Florida U.S. Coast Guard Housing -Purchaser: Miami-Dade County - Negotiated Sale; 39.45 acres -Relocation funds enabled acquisition of additional property for housing construction in Florida Keys.
12. The Process -Put together SOW & IGE -Compete SOW out on BPA (5 vendors) -Award TAR, phone conference with contractor -60 days to complete DRAFT -10 days to complete FINAL -Throughout: Maintain contact with region, and contractor
13. Example: Vero Beach Monitoring Station Asset Recommendations -Retain property -Create document repository -Clear up lease issues, i.e. who is responsible for property care -Explore cost effectiveness of antenna -Consider downsizing -Consider divesting main building/retain access easement for maintenance of applicable equipment
14. TAR Plus… -Agencies have started to request additional asset studies on TAR -NRCS -TAR, Energy Audit, Sustainability Audit, and Facilities Condition Assessment -Work with contractors, subcontractors, auditors -Weekly meetings, attend site visits, monitor subcontractor progress
15. Conclusions -Supports EO13327 -Voluntary customer-centric tool to assist them with real property decision making -Designed to help federal agencies with portfolio management -39 requests for TARs are under consideration in FY 10