1. Managing with the FAP Data Model
March 2015
ICASS Service Center

2. Training Goals Learn how to use the FAP Data Model
Understand the data sources
Leverage ILMS and ICASS Data
Discuss what’s new in FAP Management

3. What is the FAP Data Model?
Measures FAP performance
Provides stakeholders assurances on the status of FAP financial management
Captures the level of ongoing FAP capitalization
Uses post ILMS Data and ICASS budget information
Calculates a ratio of liquid assets compared to accrued depreciation
Changes every year … understand why! 

4. Where Does the Data Come From?
The FAP Data Model resides on the FAP page of the ICASS website
It is updated twice a year, linked to the ICASS budget cycle and ILMS inventory data
Uses the Initial and Final budget information on FAP carryover, DN collections, and the annual FAP target
Captures ILMS inventory data in September, at the end of the summer transfer cycle and after receipt of new procurements, and again in March, after the annual inventory process

5. ICASS Data
This data comes from the ICASS Global Database and provides background information on the mission FAP
This data is not used in calculating the Sustainability Coefficient but is useful in interpreting it.

6. ICASS Budget Data
Three amounts are captured for each post: Col I - FAP Carryforward reported at the beginning of the fiscal year; Col J – the sum of the FAP Target (based on FAP Wkld X AA) plus DN Collections (for new buy-ins and buy-in assessments).
Updated twice each year: Based on the ICASS budget cycle, updated in January and August.
The total Amount Available for Recapitalization is the sum of your FAP carryforward, FAP target and DN Collections.

7. ILMS Data in the Model
We collect ILMS Data for all residential furniture.
Excludes designated residences, where identified.
Includes items in residences, in stock & for repair.
We use straight-line depreciation.
Furniture/furnishings – 12 years
Appliances – 6 years
Mattresses – 4 years

8. ILMS: Physical Assets
Col. G: The remaining value of all residential furniture at post. It is calculated based on straight-line depreciation; if it’s past the standard lifecycle, it is valued “$0”.
Col H: Accrued depreciation only of items in residences. This represents the future replacement costs for the FAP.

9. The Sustainability Coefficient
The total amount available for recapitalization is divided by the accumulated depreciation of assets in the residences.
This derives each post’s sustainability coefficient.

10. FAP Data Model

11. Using the FAP Data Model
Metric for Washington stakeholders
Regional bureaus, A/LM, IEB/IWG
Post Management tool for FAP
Score between .4 and .7 is ideal
Not a grade, but if you are outside the range, you need to understand why – “own” your numbers!!
Reasons could be:
Orders in the pipeline
Collections not yet registered
ILMS data not yet updated
Buy-in assessments not collected

12. Case Study 1: Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
Adjusted Basic Package Count
FAP Wkld Count
Buy-In Cost
Annual Assessmt Cost
Remaining Value of Physical Assets
Accumulated Depreciation of Physical Assets
FAP Carry Forward
FY14 FAP Target
DN Collections
FY14 FAP Target & DN Collections
Amount Available for Recapitaliza- tion
Sustain- ability Co-Efficient A B D E G H I * J
K (I+J)
L (K/H)
Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
What is driving the coefficient?
What are they doing right?
Should they have any concerns? What should they be watching?
What should their plan be for FY2015?
56.0
55.0
$ 52,000
$ 5,170
$ 1,237,967
$ 1,215,610
$ ,500
$ ,000
$ ,700
$ ,700
$ ,200
0.75

13. Case Study 2: Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
Adjusted Basic Package Count
FAP Wkld Count
Buy-In Cost
Annual Assessmt Cost
Remaining Value of Physical Assets
Accumulated Depreciation of Physical Assets
FAP Carry Forward
FY14 FAP Target
DN Collections
FY14 FAP Target & DN Collections
Amount Available for Recapitaliza- tion
Sustain- ability Co-Efficient A B D E G H I * J
K (I+J)
L (K/H)
303.0
233.0
$ 49,866
$ 4,582
$ 3,882,856
$ 3,978,033
$ ,600
$ 1,044,000
$ ,200
$ 1,723,200
$ 1,939,800
0.49
Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
What is driving the coefficient?
What are they doing right?
Should they have any concerns? What should they be watching?
What should their plan be for FY2015?

14. Case Study 3: Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
Adjusted Basic Package Count
FAP Wkld Count
Buy-In Cost
Annual Assessmt Cost
Remaining Value of Physical Assets
Accumulated Depreciation of Physical Assets
FAP Carry Forward
FY14 FAP Target
DN Collections
FY14 FAP Target & DN Collections
Amount Available for Recapitaliza- tion
Sustain- ability Co-Efficient A B D E G H I * J
K (I+J)
L (K/H)
Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
What is driving the coefficient?
What are they doing right?
Should they have any concerns? What should they be watching?
What should their plan be for FY2015?
66.0
$ 70,940
$ 4,200
$ 3,126,785
$ 1,616,658 $
$ ,400
0.17

15. Case Study 4: Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
Adjusted Basic Package Count
FAP Wkld Count
Buy-In Cost
Annual Assessmt Cost
Remaining Value of Physical Assets
Accumulated Depreciation of Physical Assets
FAP Carry Forward
FY14 FAP Target
DN Collections
FY14 FAP Target & DN Collections
Amount Available for Recapitaliza- tion
Sustain- ability Co-Efficient A B D E G H I * J
K (I+J)
L (K/H)
Is this post under/over-capitalized or just right?
What is driving the coefficient?
What are they doing right?
Should they have any concerns? What should they be watching?
What should their plan be for FY2015?
127.0
125.8
$ 85,735
$ 5,750
$ 2,289,495
$ 1,420,395
$1,280,420
$ ,600
$ ,900
$ 1,052,500
$ 2,332,920
1.64

16. Using ILMS Data Location
Relies on post inventory records for all locations, but particularly residences
Coefficient is based on depreciated value of what is currently at each residence
Value
Reflects the original purchase price/shipping
Does not account for current costs
Type of Surplus
Remaining assets don’t always match up with replacement requirements
Purchase decisions must rely on GSO’s knowledge of WH stock vs. needs

17. ILMS Data Issue - ACTION
Agency Code
Currently a free form text field/not standard post-to post or residence-to-residence
Results in imprecise/inconsistent data
When we pull the data, we have to make assumptions to identify FAP items
These assumptions have large impacts on your Sustainability Model
Asset ID
Agency Code
Description
1239
STATE
Sofa, 3 Seat
465
ICASS
Table, end
4674
JERF POOL
Table, Coffee
PROG
Mattress, Queen
BLAIR
Chair, easy

18. Standardize FAP Agency Code
A/LM will be creating a standard ‘FAP’ Agency Code for all Posts.

19. GSO Action Plan
Use the Mass Update/Transfers link to update all FAP items with the new “FAP” agency code
For specific instructions, please review the online tutorials in ILMS or contact

20. ICASS Data Issues Ensure that FAP Workload counts are accurate.
Exclude CMR, DCR* and POR
Properly count and weight dedicated residences for RESAID, RESDAO, RESFCS and RESFAS as 1.2
Be aware of agency plans to join your FAP
Be aware of new positions coming to post
Ensure Buy-ins and/or Buy-in assessments are being collected

21. Next Steps Include more detail in the Data Model
“Remaining Value” and “Accumulated Depreciation” will be broken out by “In Stock” and “In Residence” locations
Will provide additional insight on furniture holdings
Develop a new FAP tool in ILMS to calculate buy-in and annual assessment costs
Expand implementation of Inventory Optimization

22. Inventory Optimization
Inventory Management Tool
Key Characteristics
Impacts
Manual replenishment process
Reactive procurements
Best guess ordering.
No visibility into demand
Current State
Buy to spend remaining funds
Buy to fill the warehouse
Buying in sets
Multiple furniture styles
Data-driven replenishment
Proactive planning /purchasing
Buy what you need, when you need it.
Forecasting demand trends
Future State*
Buy what you need
Buy to replace assets
Avoid buying sets
Smart furniture style choices
* Note: Order Suggestions are made at the Asset Class level.

23. Inventory Optimization Framework
Implementing the Inventory Optimization Tool will help to answer the core questions required to make an accurate furniture procurement:

24. Future of FAP Management
Improved Supply Chain Management
Fenced funding allows for targeted procurements
In October of each year, GSO should project requirements for the upcoming year, based on ILMS data, projected transfers, anticipated growth
Order items vs. sets
SMART Warehousing
No need to keep it filled/order to needs
Cost Containment/Savings
Consolidated FAP/improved ordering
Reduced WH requirements
Extended lifecycles/better management

25. Resources ICASS website/FAP page
FAP Data Model
OCCI portal:
A/LM Post Dashboard
Inventory Optimization
Send questions to:
Nolan Leavitt
Janet Buechel
A/LM:

26. COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS

27. FAQs
Our policy includes an LQA option, but it really isn’t. What should we do?
What are some cost cutting ideas?
Can I use FAP funds for refurbishment costs? Welcome kits?
Can welcome kits be considered “disposable”?
We have lots of inventory and carryover. Can we reduce our annual assessment for a year or two?
How can we increase/decrease our annual assessment?
If LQA is not a viable option, post management should prepare a justification (e.g., limited availability of suitable housing, significant make-ready requirements for safety/security upgrades, overall security situation at post, etc.) and present it to the ICASS Council for their concurrence. Once approved, send the revised policy to the bureau and the ISC so the central records can be updated. Don’t know the status of your post? Check the Status of FAP Policies on the ICASS website.
Extending the useful life of furniture items is the obvious one. Some posts have purchased protective glass tops for tables if that is cheaper than just refinishing the table tops. Large items like dining room buffets and china cabinets receive less wear/tear and their lifecycle could be extended. Periodically review the list of items being provided to ensure they are appropriate.
Fenced FAP funds may only be used for the purchase and shipping of the FAP items on the post’s established list. They may not/not be used for refurbishment costs or welcome kits; these costs are funded from within the regional bureau target amount.
Welcome kits are government property and must be disposed of in accordance with established regulations; they are not “disposable” or given to occupants without further accountability. Posts should ensure that welcome kits contain only those items required for immediate occupancy of a unit.
As posts develop experience with managing the FAP and its FAP resources, the FMO and GSO should maintain a multi-year spending plan (assisted with IO!) and determine if its resources exceed those requirement. Since the inception of the FAP, many posts have adjusted their AA downward permanently and others have determined that a one or two-year downward adjustment was needed to bring their resources in line with their requirements. A post should never zero out the AA for a year and instead take a multi-year reduction so that funds remain in post’s base.
When the FAP was implemented, management determined that the buy-in and annual assessment amounts should remain unchanged for three to four years, giving posts the opportunity to work with this new policy and budget. Posts that experience a significant shift in their FAP requirements (e.g., certain items were inadvertently omitted in the original list, new requirements have emerged, post’s shipping costs have changed, etc.) should submit a revised calculation spreadsheet using the standard templates (available on the ICASS website) and a justification for the increase to the regional bureau and the ICASS Service Center. The request will be reviewed and a response provided to post.