Skip to content

Approach

A Structured Approach to Infrastructure Decisions

BRICI applies a consistent, documented method to every assignment so that findings are comparable, assumptions are visible and recommendations can be traced to evidence.

  1. 01Define the Decision
  2. 02Establish the Evidence Base
  3. 03Assess Condition and Risk
  4. 04Prioritize Investment
  5. 05Translate Analysis Into Action

Phase 01

Define the Decision

Every assignment begins by establishing what decision the work needs to support.

Condition assessments, capital plans and technical studies are only useful when they answer a specific question: which assets should be renewed first, how much funding is required over ten years, whether an acquisition carries acceptable technical risk, or whether a project is on track. BRICI begins by confirming that question with the client, along with who will use the result and how.

This phase also establishes the boundaries of the work: which assets or projects are in scope, what level of detail is required, what constraints apply, and what criteria will be used to compare options or rank priorities. Agreeing these up front prevents effort being spent on information that does not change the outcome.

Typical Activities

  • Confirm objectives, audience and intended use of deliverables
  • Define asset, project or portfolio scope
  • Identify constraints, regulatory context and funding cycles
  • Agree decision criteria, rating scales and prioritization logic

Typical Deliverables

  • Scope and methodology memorandum
  • Agreed assessment framework and criteria

Phase 02

Establish the Evidence Base

Assemble, review and structure the information that already exists before generating new data.

Most organizations already hold substantial information: drawings, prior assessments, maintenance records, work-order histories, cost data, project reports and asset registers. Much of it is inconsistent, out of date or held in formats that are difficult to use. BRICI reviews this material systematically, identifies gaps, and structures it into a form that can support analysis.

Where information is missing or unreliable, the gap is documented and a proportionate plan is made to close it, whether through site assessment, targeted investigation, or engagement of specialist partners. The aim is a defensible evidence base with known limitations, not an illusion of completeness.

Typical Activities

  • Document and data collection from client systems and archives
  • Asset register review and reconciliation
  • Data quality assessment and gap analysis
  • Structuring of asset, condition and cost information

Typical Deliverables

  • Structured asset inventory or register
  • Data gap register and information plan

Phase 03

Assess Condition and Risk

Apply a consistent framework to establish condition, remaining life and consequence of failure.

Condition is assessed at a system level using documented rating scales, so that results are comparable across buildings, sites and assessors. Observations are recorded with supporting photographs and linked to the asset inventory. Remaining service life is estimated from observed condition, age, maintenance history and typical lifecycle expectations.

Condition alone does not determine priority. BRICI also considers the consequence of failure for each asset or system: the effect on operations, safety, compliance, service delivery and cost. Combining likelihood and consequence produces a risk profile that reflects what matters to the organization, not just what is physically deteriorated.

Typical Activities

  • Desktop review and site assessment
  • System-level condition rating and deficiency identification
  • Remaining service life estimation
  • Consequence-of-failure assessment and risk scoring

Typical Deliverables

  • Condition assessment reports with photographic record
  • Risk register or risk matrix by asset and system

Phase 04

Prioritize Investment

Convert condition and risk information into a ranked, costed and defensible capital program.

Capital needs are costed, scheduled and ranked against the criteria agreed in the first phase. Prioritization is transparent: each recommendation can be traced to the condition observation, risk score and cost basis that produced it. This allows the program to be explained to councils, boards, funders and auditors, and to be adjusted when assumptions change.

Scenario analysis tests the program against alternative funding levels and timing, so that decision-makers understand the consequences of deferral as well as the benefits of investment. Where portfolio-level trade-offs are required, BRICI provides the analysis to compare options on a consistent basis.

Typical Activities

  • Capital cost estimation and lifecycle costing
  • Prioritization scoring and ranking
  • Multi-year program development
  • Scenario and funding-level analysis

Typical Deliverables

  • Prioritized multi-year capital program
  • Scenario comparison and funding analysis

Phase 05

Translate Analysis Into Action

Deliver findings in a form that people can use, and support implementation where required.

Reports are structured for their audience: executive summaries for leadership, detailed system-level findings for facility teams, and structured data for asset-management systems. Dashboards and analytical tools are provided where they will be maintained and used, not as a substitute for clear written recommendations.

Where the client requires it, BRICI continues into implementation: scoping subsequent assessment or design work, supporting procurement, providing owner-side project management or project controls, and updating the capital program as projects are delivered and conditions change.

Typical Activities

  • Report and presentation development
  • Dashboard and data deliverable configuration
  • Implementation planning and scope development
  • Ongoing program support and updates

Typical Deliverables

  • Final reports and executive presentations
  • Dashboards, structured data and implementation plan

Quality

Quality and Consistency

Consulting deliverables are only as useful as they are reliable. BRICI applies the following practices across assignments.

  • Standardized Assessment Frameworks

    Condition ratings, risk scoring and prioritization criteria are defined and documented before work begins, so that results are consistent across assets, sites and assessors.

  • Documented Assumptions

    Cost bases, service-life expectations, escalation rates and scoring weights are recorded and provided with deliverables, allowing clients to review and update them.

  • Quality Review

    Deliverables are reviewed for technical accuracy, internal consistency and alignment with the agreed scope before issue.

  • Data Validation

    Asset and condition data are checked for completeness, duplication, logical consistency and alignment with source documents.

  • Traceable Recommendations

    Each recommendation can be traced to the observations, ratings and costs that produced it, supporting audit and stakeholder review.

  • Clear Reporting

    Reports are written for their intended audience, with findings stated directly and supporting detail organized for reference rather than volume.

Technology

Technology-Enabled Delivery

Technology is used to improve the speed, consistency and depth of analysis. It supports professional judgment; it does not replace it.

Discuss How This Approach Applies to Your Assets

Every assignment is scoped to the decision it needs to support. Contact BRICI to discuss requirements and delivery options.

Discuss a Project