The Eppley Institute in partnership with the National Park Service has worked to meet Obama's request through a number of training initiatives. First in training in the Asset Priority Index. The API is a balanced scorecard approach which allows park, recreation, and public lands agency managers or stewards to compare the relative importance of facilities in relation to one another (DOI, 2005). Once an API has been established for each distinct entity, management is able to make decisions as to which assets may be disposed of.
The next initiative was to develop training in the Park Asset Management Plan (PAMP). The components of the PAMP are simple:
- Identify current footprint-What do we own? What condition is it in?
- Identify funding needed to maintain all that we own
- Identify current funding-How much are we currently receiving to maintain what we own?
- How do we bridge the gap between what is needed and what we receive in terms of maintenance dollars?
One of the strategies to bridge the gap is to dispose of property that does not support the mission or operations of the agency. It is important to note that disposition does not necessarily mean demolishing or removing an asset, such as leasing, transfer to another agency, sale to public benefit conveyances, sale by negotiation, abandonment, or finally demolition.
What do you think: Could there be unintended consequences of this decision?
Christy McCormick
Comments
Juliana Smith wrote:
Tuesday, 15 June 2010 15:35
A periodic review of holdings is always an acceptable management function. However, given the financial/funding disaster that we face at this time there may be a strong sentiment to slash costs for the sake of cost cutting at the sacrifice of long term goals for which the assets were acquired.
Today more than ever the balance betwen the relative value of any given asset and the potential fiscal benefit that its disposition might accrue needs to be "conservatively" assessed. The disposition of "surplus" assets must be taken with the full knowledge of the primary intent behind its original purchase and an affirmative answer to the question: "Does continued ownership still meet the mission for which it was acquired?" If the answer remains "yes" then the asset(s) must be retained.
In the private sector only a fool liquidates capital assets to meet current cash flow challenges.
Assets should NOT be liquidated simply because of current budget issues; this is short sighted and in the case of the NPS, contrary to its dual mission of conservation and access to the nation's "crown jewels."
DOI asset "disposal" must proceed slowly and deliberately. There must not be a "fire sale" of these assets.