Asset management & reliability engineering

Know what you own,
what condition it's in,
and what it will cost you.

B Industries builds the asset register, assesses the condition, prices the gap and writes the maintenance program — for schools, hospitals, warehouses and small manufacturers who were never going to get this from a national engineering firm.

Start a conversation See the tools
5
4
3
2
1
Every building element and every piece of equipment you own sits somewhere on this scale. Most organisations cannot say where. That is where we start.
10+
Years in reliability and asset management
CMRP
Certified Maintenance & Reliability Professional
1,300+
Equipment and instrument classes in our task library
GxP
Regulated pharmaceutical and medical device experience
What we do

Asset management,
start to finish.

Two disciplines, applied together: the condition of the buildings you occupy, and the reliability of the equipment inside them. Most organisations manage one badly and the other not at all.

Facility condition assessment

Your buildings broken down to the ASTM E1557 UNIFORMAT II elemental standard, condition-rated element by element, and turned into a Facility Condition Index, a deferred maintenance backlog and a ten-year capital renewal plan.

How it works →

Reliability & maintenance programs

Equipment asset registers with criticality ranking, preventive maintenance task plans written failure-mode first, and the gap between what you do today and where you should be — quantified in labour hours and dollars.

How it works →

Industrial performance and efficiency

OEE definition and measurement that survives scrutiny, KPI and OPI development, loss analysis, and energy and utilities cost reduction. Offered to clients where the maintenance work has already landed and the next constraint is throughput rather than uptime.

Facility condition assessment

Built on UNIFORMAT II,
not on a clipboard.

We assess buildings using the ASTM E1557 UNIFORMAT II elemental classification — the same standard used for building cost estimating, so the condition data lines up with the way costs are actually structured. Seven major groups, 22 group elements, 79 individual elements.

ASubstructureFoundations, slab on grade, basement construction.
BShellSuperstructure, exterior walls, windows and doors, roofing.
CInteriorsPartitions, doors, fittings, stairs, wall, floor and ceiling finishes.
DServicesConveying, plumbing, HVAC, fire protection, electrical.
EEquipment & FurnishingsInstitutional, commercial and vehicular equipment, fixed furnishings.
FSpecial ConstructionSpecial structures and systems, and hazardous components abatement.
GBuilding SiteworkSite preparation, improvements, mechanical and electrical utilities.
1–5Rated, not described Every element scored 5 Excellent to 1 Poor, by the percentage of its quantity in each state. Three or above is in good repair.

What comes out of it

Facility Condition IndexDeferred maintenance cost over current replacement value. The single number a board, a lender or a district office understands.
Deferred maintenance backlogWhat it would cost today to bring every element back to good repair, itemised by element.
Ten-year capital renewal planRenewal spend by year and by system, driven by remaining useful life rather than by whoever shouted loudest.
Elemental condition reportEvery element with its quantity, condition distribution, rating and replacement cost, rolled up through the hierarchy.
Priority and safety findingsWorst-first ranking, plus anything that needs a qualified review before a capital decision is made.
Photographic recordEvery finding evidenced. Drone survey of roofs, facades and thermal where access is the obstacle.

What makes a condition assessment defensible

Three things, and most assessments miss at least one. The classification has to be a recognised standard, so a second assessor reaches the same structure. The aggregation method has to be stated, because weighting by replacement cost and taking a median produce different answers from identical field data. And the field data has to record the distribution of condition across an element rather than one inspector's overall impression — a roof that is 70% failed and 30% sound is not a "fair" roof.

We do all three, every time, and the method section of the report states exactly which aggregation was used and what the assessment does not cover.

Reliability engineering

Maintenance programs
that survive a busy week.

A schedule built on assumption gets abandoned the first time production gets tight. A schedule built on criticality and failure modes gets defended. The difference is whether anyone did the analysis.

01

Equipment asset register

Walked and recorded, not estimated from a spreadsheet someone inherited.

  • Make, model, serial and location captured off the rating plate
  • Condition coded A to F, criticality ranked High, Medium or Low
  • Priority score of condition severity multiplied by criticality, so the broken thing in the production line outranks the broken thing in the storeroom
  • Photo evidence per asset, and a condemnation list for what should be written off
02

PM task plans matched to criticality

Tasks written failure-mode first: what you are looking for and why it fails, not "inspect the unit".

  • Job plans drawn from a library of over 1,300 equipment and instrument classes
  • Time-based PM, condition monitoring and calibration schedules, separated properly
  • Frequencies weighted by criticality and tuned to your actual staffing — quarterly on critical assets that gets done beats monthly that does not
  • Printable technician work lists, and loading into your CMMS or one we set up with you
03

PM gap analysis, priced

Where the program sits today, where it should be, and what the difference costs in labour.

  • Current state benchmarked against a defined maturity ladder, class by class
  • Gap expressed in hours per year, fully loaded dollars and full-time equivalents
  • Named tasks that get added — "adds mechanical ultrasound monthly, vibration analysis monthly, electrical infrared quarterly" — rather than an abstraction
  • A number a plant manager or a facilities director can take into a budget conversation
04

Capability building

If it only works while we are on site, it has not worked.

  • Coaching maintenance leads and operators, not just handing over procedures
  • Operator care routines that the people running the equipment can actually hold
  • Spare parts and criticality-driven stocking decisions
  • Handover of the register, the schedules and the job plans in a system your team can run

The maturity ladder

Every equipment class is placed on this ladder, current state against target. The gap between two rungs is a number, not an opinion.

RungTierWhat it means in practice
0ReactiveNothing scheduledWork happens when something breaks. Most small sites are here on most of their asset base, whatever the CMMS says.
1Operator CareRoutine checks by operatorsShort daily and weekly checks done by the people who run the equipment. Cheapest rung to add and the one that catches the most.
2Essential CareVisual inspection and basic careThe floor of a credible program. Enough to defend in an audit, not enough to prevent much.
3Planned MaintenanceFull time-based PMEvery task on a calendar, including calibration and functional testing. This is where most regulated sites need to be.
4Condition-BasedPM plus condition monitoringVibration, thermography, ultrasound, oil analysis and motor circuit testing on the assets that justify it. Not everything justifies it.

Not every asset should reach rung 4. Deciding which ones should is the actual work.

Who this is for

Organisations too small
for a national firm,
too big to guess.

If you own buildings and equipment but have no asset register, no condition baseline and no capital plan, you are the client. Here is what each sector usually finds.

Schools & districts

Small school districts and independent schools

Buildings acquired across decades, a capital request process driven by whichever roof failed last, and no defensible number to take to a board or a bond vote.

In any pre-1990 building, hazardous components abatement is frequently the largest single liability on the report — and the one nobody has priced. We assess it under F2020 and put a number on it.

Healthcare

Hospitals, clinics and county health facilities

Clinical equipment uptime measured in something other than dollars, plus building systems that carry life-safety obligations most facility teams are carrying alone.

UNIFORMAT has no dedicated medical gas element. We assess medical gas and vacuum under D2090, isolation and theatre air handling under D3090, nurse call under D5030, isolated power under D5090 — and say so in the report, so your estate team can find them.

Warehouse & distribution

Warehouses and distribution centres

Large envelope, thin building services, and a slab that is doing more work than anyone acknowledges until the racking starts moving.

Four elements carry most of the risk: slab on grade, roof coverings, sprinkler systems and yard pavement. We scope accordingly rather than charging you to survey offices you barely use.

Manufacturing

Small and mid-size manufacturers

Maintenance carried by two or three people who know everything and have written none of it down, and a capital plan that is really a wish list.

Process equipment that is not part of the building stays in the equipment register rather than being forced into the building classification. Both get assessed; they do not get mixed up.

Regulated manufacturing

Pharmaceutical, medical device and animal health

Calibration, requalification and environmental monitoring obligations sitting alongside ordinary maintenance, often in the same overloaded schedule.

Calibration, functional testing, electrical safety testing, environmental monitoring and periodic requalification are separate procedure types in our library — not notes appended to a PM.

Public & institutional

Municipal, transit and institutional estates

Reporting obligations that require a condition measure on a defined scale and a defined cycle, with no internal capacity to produce one.

We can report against either UNIFORMAT II or the FTA ten-component breakdown, on the five-point TERM scale, with the aggregation method stated.

Method

Measure, quantify,
sequence, embed.

Most programs fail at step one. An organisation cannot prioritise what it has never counted, and a plan built on assumption is abandoned the first busy week.

Step one

Count it

A complete register — building elements to UNIFORMAT II, equipment with make, model, serial, condition and criticality. Walked and recorded.

Step two

Price the gap

Deferred maintenance against replacement value for the buildings. Current maintenance effort against target for the equipment. Both in dollars.

Step three

Sequence the work

Condition severity weighted by criticality, and renewal driven by remaining useful life. The plan says what comes first and why.

Step four

Hand it over

Registers, schedules and job plans live with your team in a system they can run, with the people trained to run it.

Inside the tools

The survey, the maths
and the report —
in one place.

We do not assess your estate on paper and retype it afterwards. The same tool records the survey in the field, does the aggregation, and produces the report you are handed. Here is what that looks like.

Portfolio overview

One number in front of the board

The Facility Condition Index for the whole portfolio, the condition profile of every element coded A to F, and the work ranked worst-first by severity multiplied by criticality.

Deferred cost against current replacement value, stated as a percentage
Repair backlog priced, not described
Each facility broken out, so a district or an estate can be compared building to building
Facility Condition dashboard showing a facility condition index of 8.4 percent, a condition profile bar and a worst-first action list across three facilities.
Guided assessment

The tool assesses with the inspector

All 79 UNIFORMAT II elements carry their own field guide: what to inspect, what commonly goes wrong, how to turn what you are looking at into a score, and what should be flagged for a qualified review.

It means a surveyor on their first estate and one on their hundredth record the same thing — which is the entire basis of comparing one building to another.

Condition entered as a distribution across the element, not one overall impression
Safety flags raised at the point of observation
Notes and photographs attached element by element
Element B3010 Roof Coverings open in the audit, with an expanded inspector guide listing what to inspect, common defects, how to score it and safety triggers.
Aggregation

Element to group to building

Ratings roll up through the UNIFORMAT hierarchy using the aggregation method chosen at the start of the survey — weighted by replacement cost, weighted by criticality, or median. The method is stated in the report, because identical field data gives different answers under each.

Replacement cost carried up alongside the rating
Condition distribution visible at every level
Change one element and every level above it moves
Elemental summary table rolling ratings up from individual elements to group elements to the seven UNIFORMAT major groups, with distribution bars and replacement cost.
Deliverable

A report you can hand over the same day

Facility details, the classification standard and level, the good-repair verdict against the stated threshold, the summary, and the full elemental table with quantity, distribution, rating and cost.

States what the assessment covers and what it does not
Printed to PDF from the browser — no export step, no desktop software
The same document whether the survey was done online or with no signal at all
Generated condition assessment report for School A, showing the overall rating, facility details, good repair verdict and the elemental condition table.
Capital planning

Ten years, sequenced by life left

Renewal spend laid out year by year, driven by remaining useful life rather than by whichever system failed most recently. Anything at end of life lands in the current year.

Total replacement value and ten-year renewal need side by side
Every asset driving the plan listed, so the number can be interrogated line by line
Exported or printed straight into a budget submission
Capital plan view with total replacement value, ten-year renewal need, a renewal-by-year bar chart and the table of assets driving the plan.

Screens show demonstration data. Facility names are generic by design — client estates are never used as examples, in marketing or anywhere else.

What an engagement looks like

Scoped small enough
to actually finish.

Assessment work fails more often from over-scoping than from under-scoping. A survey that takes nine months is obsolete before it is delivered. These are realistic shapes — the right one depends on what you already have.

EngagementTypicallyYou get
Condition baseline One building, 1–2 days on site UNIFORMAT II Level 3 assessment, FCI, deferred backlog, elemental report, photographic record.
Portfolio screen 3–12 buildings, Level 2 pass Comparable condition ratings across the estate so capital can be pointed at the right building before anyone pays for a full survey.
Capital plan Follows a baseline Ten-year renewal profile by year and by system, with the assets driving each year listed and priced.
Equipment register 1–3 days per site Every asset walked and recorded, condition coded, criticality ranked, priority scored, condemnation list produced.
PM program build Follows a register Task plans per class, frequencies set against criticality and staffing, job plans printed or loaded into your CMMS.
Gap analysis Can stand alone Current maturity against target, class by class, costed in hours, dollars and FTE — the business case for the program.
Roof & aerial survey Add-on, half a day Drone imagery of roofs and facades where access is the obstacle, tied back to the elements it evidences.

Most clients start with one building or one site. It is the cheapest way to find out whether the output is worth having before committing an estate to it.

Straight answers

Questions worth
asking first.

We already have a CMMS. Does this replace it?

No, and it should not. A CMMS is a system of record for work orders. What most sites are missing is the thing that goes into it: a complete register, a criticality ranking, and task plans that someone has actually reasoned about. We build that, hand it over in a form your CMMS can take, and leave the CMMS where it is.

If there is no CMMS at all, the tools here will run a small estate on their own — a register, a schedule and a work list is most of what a two-person maintenance team needs.

What if the site has no internet?

The field tools work with no connection at all. They are installed to the tablet or phone once and then run offline — the survey, the calculations and the report are all produced on the device. Nothing is uploaded unless you choose to send the file.

That is a deliberate design decision rather than a feature. Plant rooms, roofs, basements and rural facilities are exactly where connectivity fails and where the assets are.

Who holds the data?

You do. An engagement is one file that you receive and keep. Nothing sits on a third-party server by default, and the task library is read by the tool rather than stored inside your records — so the register you are handed is yours to move anywhere.

Can we buy the facility assessment without the reliability work, or the other way round?

Yes. They are two services and they sell separately. A school district usually wants the condition assessment and the capital plan. A manufacturer usually wants the register and the PM program. Neither is a prerequisite for the other.

Where a client takes both, the two run against one engagement file and share the site list, so a facility surveyed once appears in both — but each tool only ever edits its own half. The buildings work and the equipment work stay cleanly separable in the deliverable.

Is UNIFORMAT II the right standard for us?

For buildings, almost always — it is an ASTM standard (E1557) also used for building cost estimating, so the condition data lines up with how costs are structured, and a second assessor arrives at the same breakdown. For transit and some public estates with their own reporting obligations, we can report against the FTA ten-component breakdown on the same five-point scale instead.

What matters more than the choice is that it is stated. An assessment that does not name its classification or its aggregation method cannot be checked, repeated, or compared to next year's.

What does the assessment deliberately not cover?

It is a condition assessment, not a structural engineering report, a hazardous materials survey, a code compliance audit or a valuation. Where an element needs a qualified specialist — structural movement, asbestos, a fire engineering judgement — the report says so and flags it rather than guessing. That boundary is written into the method section of every report.

Our facilities are overseas. Does that work?

Yes. The tools were built partly for work in facilities where power, connectivity and spare parts are all constraints, and the condition codes distinguish between equipment that can be repaired on site and equipment waiting on parts or an external service — which is the distinction that actually governs what happens next.

Client tools

Facility Condition

UNIFORMAT II elemental audits with inspector guidance on all 79 elements, capital renewal planning, and roof and aerial survey.

  • Guided audit, seven major groups
  • FCI, deferred backlog, ten-year plan
  • Client-ready report
Open Facility Condition

See what it produces →

Client tools

ReliaBility+

Equipment registers with criticality scoring, maintenance plans, printable job plans from a 1,300-class library, and costed maturity gap analysis.

  • Register, criticality and priority scoring
  • PM schedules and job plans
  • Gap in hours and dollars
Open ReliaBility+

See what it produces →

Sold separately or together. Where a client takes both, one engagement file carries the facility and the equipment work side by side.

Start a conversation

Tell me what
you own.

The first conversation is short and costs nothing: what the estate is, what records exist today, and what decision is waiting on the answer. If an assessment is not what you need, I will say so.

wallacebarasa@gmail.com (269) 267-5870
Email B Industries LinkedIn
Wallace Barasa, CMRP
Certified Maintenance & Reliability Professional. Over a decade in reliability engineering and operational excellence across pharmaceutical, medical device and industrial manufacturing.
Based in Kalamazoo, Michigan
Serving southwest Michigan, northern Indiana and the wider Midwest. Work outside the region considered where the scope justifies the travel.
Useful things to have ready
A list of buildings with approximate age and floor area, any equipment list you already hold however rough, and whatever the last capital request looked like. None of it is required — it just makes the first conversation faster.
Client tools
Facility Condition and ReliaBility+ are access-controlled and issued to clients on engagement.