Skip to Main Content

Facilities Management Business Justification Report

In support of the State of Tennessee’s efforts to improve services and lower taxpayer costs in its real estate operations, a comprehensive business justification cost savings analysis was performed. This analysis explores whether acquiring services through a professional facilities management provider offers improved care and maintenance at state facilities at a lower cost to taxpayers. The potential savings analysis includes higher education and those state government properties not already maintained by a professional facilities management service provider. This report provides a compilation of the exploration governance, methodology and findings of the business justification analysis.

The links to the left of this page provide the following information:

  • FM Exploration Business Justification Report - Detailed document that includes a compilation of the exploration governance, methodology and findings of the business justification potential cost savings analysis.
  • Business Just. Fact Sheet – One page overview that provides the focus areas of the report and summary of findings.
  • Cost Analysis Data Sheets Source data documents compiled and provided by higher education institutions and the state that determines their benchmarks.
  • News Release: Business Justification Report - News release announcing the results of the report.
  • Presentation: Business Justification Overview - Presentation by CFG Director Terry Cowles before the Senate State and Local Government Committee on the results, March 8, 2016.
  • Joint Statement State, UT, TBR on FM – Joint statement by the state, UT, and TBR on the facilities management exploration in advance of the release of the business justification report, February 17, 2016.

The business justification report was developed through an interagency effort led by CFG that includes representation from the legislative branch, Tennessee Board of Regents, University of Tennessee, and other partner state agencies. The following key points are emphasized throughout these materials:

  • Any potential contract with a professional service provider will include strict language prohibiting the successful vendor from initiating any reduction in force at any time during the contract period and no current qualified and productive employee will lose their job because of a contract.
  • In addition, this effort will offer employee protections by seeking to provide continuous employment opportunities with comparable compensation and benefits subject to satisfactory job performance. 
  • The final decision on whether to use a service provider rests with the various state agencies/campuses who can choose not to participate in such an arrangement even after state costs are independently verified/validated, cost proposals are received, and a final comparison of validated state costs to provider costs is complete.
  • This means state agencies/campuses do not have to make any final decisions until after these additional activities are complete, which the report projects to be late 2016.
  • Savings achieved by participants can be redirected at the campus/state agency level to further enhance their programs.