Enterprise Asset Management Business Case and Return on Investment Analysis Services

The Vendor is required to provide enterprise asset management (EAMS) business case and return on investment analysis.
- Currently maintains information on its assets in a variety of systems that do not comprehensively meet asset management needs.
- The agency’s asset management approach depends on a combination of custom software solutions (some with core software dating back to the 1980s), general ledger accounting systems, numerous spreadsheets and other databases developed and managed by various departments.
- To move from this current state to a coordinated state of systems and business practices, agency desires to evaluate the potential of an Enterprise Asset Management system (EAMS) to replace legacy systems and support asset management activities from purchase through retirement.
- Based on previous analyses and experience from peers, an EAMS could enable staff to perform and track work-orders, accurately manage asset inventory, accurately capture condition assessments, track life-cycle management needs, and accurately capture total cost of ownership in an effective and cost-efficient manner.
- EAMS assessment project that:
• Identified and cataloged agency functional needs for asset management information systems;
• Determined and documented the current state of agency existing asset management systems;
• Identified gaps between needs and current state;
• Defined multiple alternatives for developing and/or augmenting information systems to close the gaps and meet the identified needs; and
• Developed a recommendation for implementation of a commercial “off-the-shelf” EAMS (rather than trying to re-program existing systems, build a new system, or use an open source system).
- The objective is to determine whether the investment is justified through improved asset lifecycle management, maintenance efficiency, warranty recovery and support of data-driven decision-making with the result of clearly reduced operational costs and optimized asset performance, maintenance and replacement cycles.
- The future state must also focus on minimum viable function for effectiveness and cost return, avoiding “nice to have” additional functions at least until some future, undefined date.
- Estimate the potential savings from improved asset productivity, reduced maintenance labor costs, optimized inventory, increased warranty recovery, increased production output and other contributing factors.
- Document, but do not include in payback analysis, other benefits and efficiencies that can’t be shown to result in tangible changes to budget expenditures.
- Conduct a sensitivity analysis to model best and worst case scenarios.
- Create a compelling visual and narrative-driven document suitable for executive leadership with clear decision-support information about the recommended approach and compare/contrast to a “no build” and up to one other option.