JP2002328989A - System to support decision for distribution of funds in regard to repair and reform of premises, program to have computer function as the system and computer where this program is stored - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To facilitate a decision in a funds distribution plan for repair and reform reflecting an owner's policy in regard to maintenance and management of the premises. SOLUTION: In the system, tables of levels of importance 18 and 20 storing the levels of importance for each evaluation item set according to the policy of the owner and a priority judgement table 14 storing the grade of deterioration of each place of the premises that are subjects for the repair and the reform are provided. In this case, the levels of importance stored to the levels of importance tables 18 and 20 and the levels of priority stored to the priority judgement table 14 are calculated for each spot. Furthermore, a flag is recorded indicating the repair and the reform cost for each subject place in the priority judgement table 14, a present FCI index value and that after the execution of the temporary fund distribution are calculated and comparatively displayed based on the present cost for repurchase and setting for temporary distribution of the funds for each of the premises.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a system for supporting the determination of budget allocation for facility repair and repair, a program for causing a computer to function as such a system, and a computer-readable recording of the program. It relates to a possible recording medium.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, when performing a repair and repair plan for a facility,
In general, the places where repairs and repairs are to be performed are determined based on the results of deterioration judgments made by specialists on building inspections and diagnosis. In other words, in the past, it was usual to determine the necessity of repair and rehabilitation for each target location, such as building parts and installations, exclusively using the technical index of the objective degree of deterioration, and to allocate the budget. there were.

[0003]

However, for owners who own a large number of facilities, the number of locations subject to repair and renovation is enormous, and it is difficult to grasp the state of deterioration of the entire owned facility. With conventional methods, it was not easy to determine which facility and which part of the repair budget should be allocated. Also, as described above, conventionally,
Since budget allocation is based solely on objective and technical indicators such as the degree of deterioration of the building, it is also possible to make a plan that reflects the importance of the building and policies such as the owner's thinking and policies regarding facility maintenance and management. was difficult.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The present invention has been made in view of the above points, and has been made in consideration of the above-mentioned problems, and has the following features. The purpose is to provide a system to support the decision.

[0005]

In order to achieve the above object, the invention described in claim 1 is a system for supporting the determination of budget allocation for repair and renovation of a facility, the maintenance of the facility. Importance degree storage means for storing the importance degree of the management evaluation item, deterioration degree storage means for storing the degree of deterioration of each repair target of the facility,
Priority calculation means for calculating the repair and repair priority based on the degree of importance stored in the degree of importance storage means and the degree of deterioration stored in the degree of deterioration storage means, Output means for outputting the calculated priority for each of the repair / repair target locations.

According to the first aspect of the present invention, the priority of each repair / repair location is calculated and output based on the importance of the evaluation item related to facility maintenance and the degree of deterioration of each repair / repair location. . That is, the output priority reflects the importance of the evaluation items related to facility maintenance. Therefore, according to the present invention, by setting the importance of the evaluation item in accordance with the facility owner's facility maintenance management policy, it becomes easy to make a budget allocation decision reflecting the facility owner's policy.

According to a second aspect of the present invention, in the system according to the first aspect, the evaluation item is a physical evaluation item relating to an item that is damaged when the deterioration state is left, and the deterioration state is left. It is characterized in that it includes at least one of the impact evaluation items relating to the party that influences the case.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, in the system according to the second aspect, the physical evaluation items include facility safety, legal compliance, health, property value, functionality, beauty, and the like.
And an item relating to at least one of comfort, and the impact evaluation item includes an item relating to at least one of a public / neighborhood society, a customer, an employee, and a shareholder.

According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, in the system according to any one of the first to third aspects,
Cost storage means for storing the repair and repair cost of each repair / repair target location, temporary allocation setting means for setting whether or not to temporarily allocate a budget for each of the repair / repair target locations, and reacquisition of facilities Based on the reacquired present value storage means for storing the present value, the reacquired current price, and the value set by the provisional allocation setting means, the current FCI index value and the provisionally allocated budget are calculated. An FCI calculation unit for calculating the FCI index value after execution of the budget when executed, and an FCI output unit for outputting the calculated FCI index values.

[0010] According to the invention described in claim 4, it is possible to set whether or not to temporarily allocate the budget for each repair / repair target location,
The current FCI index value and the FCI index value after budget execution based on the provisionally determined budget allocation are output. Therefore,
By referring to this output result, it is possible to easily determine whether or not the budget allocation is appropriate. Based on the determination result, the calculation is repeated while appropriately adjusting the setting of the temporary allocation, so that the optimum Budget allocation can be obtained.

[0011] The invention described in claim 5 relates to a program for causing a computer to function as a system for supporting a budget allocation decision regarding repair and repair of a facility. The present invention relates to a computer-readable recording medium on which the program is recorded.

[0012]

FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a system according to an embodiment of the present invention. As shown in FIG. 1, the system of the present embodiment is configured by a computer 10 which is, for example, a personal computer. Computer 10
Storage device (e.g., hard disk device) 10a
Is installed with a program for performing a budget allocation simulation calculation of repair and repair costs. In the present embodiment, the above-mentioned budget allocation simulation calculation is performed by executing the macro program 13 on the spreadsheet program 12 which is commercially available application software.

In the storage device 10a, data tables of a priority determination table 14, a facility attribute table 16, an investment type importance table 18, and a facility use importance table 20 are recorded. Data tables 14-20
Is configured as a data sheet that can be processed by the spreadsheet program 12, and as described later, data necessary for calculating a budget allocation simulation of repair and repair costs is recorded. The macro program 13 executes each process with reference to these data tables 14 to 20, and the contents of this process will be described later. The macro program 13
Is, for example, a floppy (registered trademark) disk, a CD-R
The storage device 10a may be installed from a portable storage medium 22 such as an OM, a DVD-ROM, a memory card, or the like, or the computer 10 may be connected to a network such as the Internet and downloaded from the network to the computer 10. May be installed.

FIG. 2 shows an example of the priority determination table 14. As shown in FIG. 2, the priority determination table 14 includes
ID, facility name, investment type, facility use, repair / repair target name (target location and repair / repair details), deterioration degree, repair / repair cost, important for each repair / repair target location of each facility owned by the user of this system Data including records including data items such as a degree item A, an importance item B, a priority value, and a budget allocation provisional decision flag are recorded. Of these data items, the investment type “1” represents business use, “2” represents both business and investment use, and “3” represents investment use. For facility use, “1” is the head office / center, “2” is the sales office,
“3” represents investment, “4” represents sales only, and “5” represents other uses.

The importance item A is an importance item relating to a physical evaluation of what is damaged in the facility if the deterioration of the facility is left unattended, and includes safety, legal compliance, health, property value, functionality, and aesthetics. , Comfort is divided into seven items, and an item that causes damage if the deterioration of the corresponding portion is left unset is set to 1. In addition, importance item B is an importance item related to the impact assessment on what kind of party will be affected if the deterioration of the facility is left unattended. It is classified into four items: public / neighborhood society, customers, employees, and shareholders. Items that are divided and that are adversely affected when the deterioration of the corresponding portion is left unset are set to “1”. For example, in the case of the record of ID 420 in FIG. 2 (replacement of the fire hose in the Nagasaki station square building), the safety, legal compliance, asset value, and functionality of the importance item A are set to “1”, respectively. This means that the safety, legal compliance, asset value, and functionality of the facility will be impaired if the relevant part (fire hose in the Nagasaki station square building) is left unaltered and not replaced. I have. In addition, the public / neighborhood, customer, and employee of importance item B are set to “1”, respectively.
It has a negative impact on neighbors, customers, and society.

The priority value indicates the repair / repair priority of each repair / repair target location, and is calculated by a method described later. The budget allocation provisional decision flag is a flag indicating whether or not the budget for the repair and repair is temporarily allocated, and is set to “1” when the budget is temporarily allocated. As described later, in the present embodiment, it is possible to determine the optimal budget allocation by performing a simulation calculation of the repair / repair budget allocation while appropriately changing the setting of the budget allocation temporary determination flag for each repair / repair target location by the user. It is possible. Furthermore, the temporary allocation investment amount is the investment amount for repair and repair when the budget is temporarily allocated, and is set to an amount equal to the repair and repair cost when the budget allocation temporary determination flag is “1”, and “0”. 0 if
Set to a circle.

FIG. 3 shows an example of the facility attribute table 16. As shown in FIG. 3, the facility attribute table 16 shows, for each facility owned by the user, the facility name, investment type, facility use, reacquisition present value, repair and repair required cost, FCI current value, budget allocation amount, FCI plan Data consisting of a record including each data item such as a value is recorded. Among these, the meaning of each value of investment type and facility usage is the same as that described in the priority determination table 14 above. Also,
The reacquisition present value is the price required to newly acquire the same facility as the current condition, and the repair and repair cost is the cumulative value of the repair and repair costs of the repair and repair target items belonging to each facility.

The FCI current value is an FCI (Facility Condition Index) index value of each facility in the current deteriorated state. Here, the FCI index value is a value obtained by dividing the cost required for repairing and repairing all the deteriorated portions of the facility by the reacquired present value. Therefore, the current FCI value is calculated by the repair required cost / replacement present value. The FCI index is a widely used index for financially assessing the need for repairs and repairs of facilities. In general, it is in a good state if it is 5% or less, and requires caution when it is 5 to 10%. State, 1
If it exceeds 0%, it is determined that the state is extremely poor.

The budget allocation amount is the repair / repair cost of each facility where the repair / repair budget is temporarily allocated (that is, the budget allocation temporary determination flag in the priority determination table is set to “1”). This is a cumulative value. The FCI plan value is an FCI index value of each facility after the budget is executed when the provisionally allocated budget is executed. That is, FC
The I plan value is calculated by (repair cost / repair cost-budget allocation amount) / replacement present value.

The priority determination table 14 and the facility attribute table 16 include, in addition to those shown in FIGS. 2 and 3,
Data items such as completion date, area name, total floor area, floor area unit price, etc. are also recorded, but since these data items are not directly related to the importance determination and budget allocation calculation processing described later, Omitted.

FIG. 4 shows an example of the investment type importance table 18. As shown in FIG. 4, the investment type importance table 1
8 records the importance parameter values of the seven small items of the importance item A and the four small items of the importance item B for each of the investment types for commercial use, business investment combined use, and investment. I have. Each importance parameter value in the investment type importance table 18 is set by a user who is a facility owner in accordance with a policy regarding maintenance of the facility itself. In the example of FIG. 4, for each investment type, the highest priority is set for safety and legal compliance in the importance item A, while the lowest priority is set for aesthetics and comfort. , And reflects the owner's policy of safety and compliance. In priority item B, higher priority is set in the order of public / neighborhood society, customers, shareholders, and employees, and the importance is placed on shareholders over employees, customers over shareholders, and publicity over customers. It reflects the owner's policy.

FIG. 5 shows an example of the facility use importance table 20. As shown in FIG. 5, the facility use importance table 20 records importance parameter values for each facility use of the head office / office center, sales office, investment facility, sales-only facility, and other facilities. Each importance parameter value of the facility use importance table 20 can be arbitrarily set by the user who is the facility owner according to his or her own policy (that is, a policy of which facilities are regarded as important).

The investment type importance table 18 and the facility use importance table 20 shown in FIGS. 4 and 5, respectively.
May be directly determined by the owner, or the AHP method (AHP: Analytic Hie
(rarchy Process), for example under expert advice. This AHP method is 2
An evaluation matrix is created by evaluating which combination is more important when comparing with two evaluation items, for all combinations of all evaluation items, and the value of the eigenvector obtained from this evaluation matrix is assigned to the importance for each evaluation item It is a method of adopting as.

The macro program 13 includes a priority calculation macro 13a for calculating a priority value in the priority determination table 14, and a priority rearranging macro 13b for sorting records in the priority determination table 14 according to the priority values. Required cost (repair investment cost) of the facility attribute table 16, budget allocation amount, cost calculation macro 13c for calculating each FCI value, FCI value for comparing and displaying the FCI value
It is composed of a graph generation macro 13d for generating a graph screen.

Hereinafter, referring to the flowchart of FIG.
A procedure for determining the repair / repair budget allocation using the system of the present embodiment will be described. Prior to making a budget allocation decision using this system, for each location of each facility owned by the owner, the facility name, investment type, use code, name of repair / repair location, degree of deterioration, repair / repair cost, importance item A・
The value ("1" or "0") of each item of the importance item B is recorded in the priority determination table 14 and the facility attribute table 16, and further, according to the owner's policy.
It is assumed that the investment type importance table 18 and the facility use importance table 20 shown in FIGS. 4 and 5 are set.

As described above, investment type importance table 1
When the flags of the importance item A and the importance item B are set in 8, the priority value is calculated for each location (S
100).

More specifically, for each item for which the flag of the importance item A and the importance item B is set to “1”, the corresponding importance parameter value is obtained by referring to the investment type importance table 18. And their sum is calculated. In the case of the record of ID 420 in FIG. 2, the investment type is “3”
(For investment), and in the importance item A, security, legal compliance, asset value, and functionality are set to “1”, and the importance corresponding to the investment type “3” of these items is: 5,
5, 4, and 3. In the importance item B, the public / neighborhood society, the customer, and the employee are set to “1”, and the importance corresponding to the investment for these items is 5, 4, and 2, respectively. Therefore, (5 + 5 + 4 +
3) + (5 + 4 + 2) = 28 is calculated. Further, with reference to the facility use importance table 20, the importance corresponding to the facility use is acquired. For the record with ID 420,
Since the facility use is “2” (business base), “3” is acquired as the facility use importance. Then, the sum of the calculated investment type importance, the facility application importance, and the deterioration degree is calculated as a priority value, and the priority determination table 1
4 is displayed. For the record with ID code 420,
Since the degree of deterioration is 4, the priority value is 28 × 3 × 4 =
336 have been calculated.

After the priority value is calculated and displayed in the corresponding column of the priority determination table 14 as described above, when the priority rearrangement macro 13b is executed, each record of the priority determination table 14 has priority. The values are sorted in descending order of the degree value (S102).

In this state, the user sets the budget allocation provisional decision flag of the repair / repair target to which the budget is to be temporarily allocated to "1" (S104). At this time, since the records are sorted in the order of the priority values, it is easy to temporarily allocate the budget in priority to the repair / repair target having the higher priority value. In this manner, for a record in which the budget allocation tentative decision flag is set to “1”, an amount equal to the repair and repair cost is displayed as the temporary allocation investment amount, and for a record in which the budget allocation tentative decision flag is set to “0”, , "0" is displayed as the provisionally allocated investment amount. For example, ID code 420
In this record, since this flag is set to “1”, 0.2 (million yen) is displayed as the provisionally allocated investment amount. On the other hand, in the record of the ID code 416, since the budget allocation temporary determination flag is set to “0”, the temporary allocation investment amount is set to 0.

Next, when the cost calculation macro 13c is executed, the repair / repair cost and the provisionally allocated investment amount are totaled for each facility (S106). Then, the total amount of the repair / repair cost is displayed as a required repair / repair cost, and the total amount of the tentatively allocated investment amount is displayed as a budget allocation amount in the corresponding columns of the facility attribute table 16, respectively. Also, the reacquired present value,
The FCI current value and the FCI plan value are calculated on the basis of the calculated repair / repair cost and the budget allocation amount as described above, and are respectively displayed in the corresponding columns of the facility attribute table 16 (S108).

Next, when the graph generation macro 13d is executed, an FCI graph screen for comparing and displaying the FCI current value and the FCI plan value in a bar graph is generated for each facility (S108). FIG. 7 shows an example of the FCI graph screen generated by the graph generation macro. The user evaluates the provisionally allocated budget with reference to a comparison graph screen as shown in FIG. 7 (S112). That is, as described above,
Although it is preferable that the FCI value is, for example, 5% or less, the FCI value before the budget allocation and the FCI value after the provisional budget allocation are compared and displayed on the comparison graph screen of FIG. Facilities (that is, the current FCI value is 10%
Have been allocated sufficient budget,
Or, conversely, the suitability of the provisionally allocated budget can be evaluated based on whether the budget is unnecessarily allocated to facilities that do not require repairs and repairs (facility whose FCI current value is 5% or less). It is. Then, it is determined whether or not the budget allocation is appropriate (S114). If so, the budget is temporarily determined to be temporarily allocated, and the process is terminated. On the other hand, if the budget distribution is not appropriate, the flow returns to S104 again to set the budget allocation tentative decision flag, and repeats the processing of S106 to S112 described above. As described above, the optimal budget allocation can be determined by repeating the budget allocation simulation calculation while correcting the temporary budget allocation with reference to the comparison graph screen.

As described above, in the system according to the present embodiment, the priority of budget allocation for each repair / repair target location is determined using the importance value of each item set according to the policy of the facility owner. In addition, it is possible to easily extract a target location having a high need for repair and / or repair reflecting the policy of the facility owner. By allocating the budget preferentially to the repair / repair target locations extracted in this manner, a consistent and reasonable budget allocation plan can be performed for a plurality of facilities owned by the owner.

Further, since the budget can be temporarily allocated and a comparison graph screen for comparing the current FCI value with the FCI value after execution of the temporarily allocated budget can be displayed, the user can select the temporarily allocated budget. Can be intuitively determined as to whether or not is appropriate. Therefore, the optimal budget allocation can be determined by repeating the simulation calculation process until an appropriate budget allocation is obtained.

In the above embodiment, seven items relating to the physical evaluation and four items relating to the impact evaluation as shown in FIG. Although four items related to facility use as shown are used, the invention is not limited to this, and other importance items reflecting the above-mentioned policy of the owner can be used.

In the above embodiment, the simulation calculation of the budget allocation is performed by the macro program 13 on the spreadsheet program 12. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and the same calculation is performed by an independent computer program. Is also good.

[0036]

According to the present invention, it is easy to make a budget allocation decision that reflects the facility owner's policy on facility maintenance.

In addition, it is possible to set whether or not to allocate a budget temporarily for each repair / repair target location,
Index value and F after budget execution based on provisionally determined budget allocation
By outputting the CI index value, it is possible to easily determine whether the budget distribution is appropriate by referring to the output result. Therefore, the optimal budget allocation can be obtained by repeating the calculation while appropriately adjusting the setting of the temporary allocation based on the determination result.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of a priority determination table.

FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a facility attribute table.

FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of an investment type importance table.

FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of a facility use importance table;

FIG. 6 is a flowchart illustrating a procedure for determining a repair / repair budget allocation using the system of the present embodiment.

FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of an FCI graph screen.

[Explanation of symbols]

 Reference Signs List 10 computer 13 macro program 14 priority judgment table 16 facility attribute table 18 investment type importance table 20 facility use importance table

Continued on the front page (54) [Title of Invention] A system for supporting the determination of budget allocation for facility repair and renovation, a program for causing a computer to function as such a system, and a computer recording this program Readable recording medium

Claims (6)

[Claims] Claims: 1. A system for supporting the determination of a budget allocation related to repair and renovation of a facility, comprising: an importance storage means for storing the importance of an evaluation item relating to the maintenance of the facility; Deterioration degree storage means for storing the degree of deterioration of the repair / repair target part; for each of the repair / repair target parts, the importance stored in the importance degree storage means, and the deterioration degree stored in the deterioration degree storage means And a priority calculating means for calculating a repair / repair priority based on the above, and an output means for outputting the calculated priority for each of the repair / repair target locations. 2. The evaluation item includes at least one of a physical evaluation item relating to an item which is damaged when the deteriorated state is left unattended, and an influence evaluation item relating to a partner which influences the case where the degraded state is left unattended. The system according to claim 1, wherein: 3. The physical evaluation item includes at least one of facility safety, legal compliance, health, property value, functionality, aesthetics, and comfort, and the impact evaluation item is public. 3. The system according to claim 2, further comprising items related to at least one of a neighborhood, a customer, an employee, and a shareholder. 4. The system according to claim 1, wherein a cost storage means for storing a repair / repair cost of each of the repair / repair target locations, and a budget for the respective repair / repair target locations. A temporary allocation setting means for setting whether or not to temporarily allocate; a reacquisition current value storage means for storing a reacquisition present value of the facility; the reacquisition current price; FCI calculating means for calculating a current FCI index value based on the set value and an FCI index value after executing the budget when the budget is temporarily allocated, and calculating each calculated FCI index value. And a FCI output means for outputting. 5. A program for causing a computer to function as a system for supporting a budget allocation decision regarding facility repair / repair, wherein the computer stores importance of evaluation items related to facility maintenance. The importance storage means and the deterioration degree storage means in which the degree of deterioration of each repair / repair target location of the facility is stored, and for each of the repair / repair target locations, the importance stored in the importance storage means A program for executing a step of calculating a repair / repair priority based on the degree of deterioration stored in the deterioration degree storage means, and a step of outputting the calculated priority for each of the repair / repair target locations. 6. A computer-readable recording medium on which the program according to claim 5 is recorded.