Skip to main content
10-Year Capital ForecastsFunding Gap AnalysisRisk PrioritizationAMP Development

Data-Driven Infrastructure Forecasts

Stop Guessing. Start Planning with Quantified Capital Data.

AssetLab gives facilities planners 10-year capital forecasts showing exactly when assets need replacement, funding gap analysis that identifies shortfalls years in advance, risk-based prioritization (CoF × LoF) that objectively ranks investment priorities, and professional AMP documentation that satisfies regulatory requirements. Explore our strategic planning tools.

Start Free Trial
10 Years
Capital Replacement Forecasts
Risk-Based
Investment Prioritization
Professional
Asset Management Plans
Data-Driven
Budget Justification

The Infrastructure Planner's Nightmare

Without systematic data, planners get budgets denied, infrastructure crumbles, and careers end

Capital Budget Denied—Again

You request $8.2M for capital replacements. The board asks "Why do we need this? Can it wait?" You show a spreadsheet with asset ages. They're unconvinced. Request denied for the third year running. Six months later, three roofs fail catastrophically, costs balloon to $4.8M in emergency repairs, and everyone asks "Why didn't you warn us this was urgent?" You did—but without quantified risk data showing safety impact, service disruption, and compliance exposure, they didn't believe you.

Hidden $42M Funding Gap

The CFO asks for a 10-year capital plan. You spend 120 hours building forecasts in Excel—every asset, different useful life formulas, inflation guesses. You project $180M in capital needs. Current funding: $138M. $42M shortfall nobody knew existed. The board is furious: "Why didn't we know about this 5 years ago?" There was no systematic way to project infrastructure needs, track deterioration, or model funding scenarios. Your infrastructure is on a collision course with fiscal reality.

AMP Deadline Looming

Provincial regulations require a comprehensive Asset Management Plan (AMP) in 90 days showing asset inventories, condition assessments, 10-year capital forecasts, funding strategies, and service level commitments. Assets are tracked in 7 different spreadsheets. Condition data is incomplete. Capital forecasts don't exist. $50K consulting quote to build the AMP, and even then it won't be maintainable. Without systematic tools, regulatory compliance is a Sisyphean nightmare that repeats annually.

10-Year Capital Forecast with Funding Gap Analysis

See exactly when infrastructure investments are needed and identify funding shortfalls years in advance

Infrastructure Investment Forecast (2025-2034)

Total Capital Needs
$285.7M
10-year infrastructure requirements
Available Funding
$174.0M
Projected funding over 10 years
Funding Gap
$111.7M
39% shortfall

Infrastructure Condition Projection

2025
78%
2026
76%
2027
73%
2028
71%
2029
68%
2030
66%
2031
63%
2032
61%
2033
58%
2034
56%

What This Shows: Current funding levels maintain infrastructure around 55-60% condition—acceptable but showing signs of deterioration and increasing risk.

Objective Investment Prioritization

Stop prioritizing based on age alone—use risk scores (CoF × LoF) to focus capital on what matters most

Age-Based Prioritization (The Old Way)

Traditional planning replaces assets based on age: "This boiler is 22 years old, useful life is 20 years, therefore it needs replacement." Problems:

  • Ignores actual asset condition (some 25-year assets are fine, some 15-year assets are failing)
  • No consideration of failure consequences (failing paint vs. failing fire suppression)
  • Boards question priorities: "Why is this roof more important than that HVAC system?"
  • Capital gets spent on low-impact assets while safety-critical systems deteriorate

Risk-Based Prioritization (The AssetLab Way)

Modern planning uses risk scores: Consequence of Failure (CoF) × Likelihood of Failure (LoF) across 6 impact dimensions. Benefits:

  • Objectively quantifies which failures matter most (safety, service, regulatory, financial)
  • Combines condition data with consequence assessment for true risk ranking
  • Boards understand priorities instantly: "This scores 20/25 because failure affects patient safety"
  • Capital investments focus on high-risk, high-impact assets that protect people and services

Example: Emergency Generator Replacement Decision

Age-Based Analysis:

Generator is 18 years old. Useful life is 20 years. Replacement not urgent—prioritize for year 3 or 4. Cost: $350K.

Risk-Based Analysis:

CoF: 5/5 (emergency power for life safety systems, surgery, ICU)
LoF: 4/5 (condition 45%, recent reliability issues)
Risk Score: 20/25 = CRITICAL PRIORITY
Action: Replace immediately. Failure during power outage = patient deaths.

Complete Capital Planning Toolkit

Everything you need to plan, justify, and execute strategic infrastructure investments

10-Year Capital Forecasts

Automatic forecasts showing when assets reach end of useful life, what replacements cost, and year-by-year capital requirements with inflation adjustments and scenario modeling.

Funding Gap Analysis

Compare required capital vs. available funding years in advance. Visualize shortfalls by year and category. Model funding scenarios to understand impacts on infrastructure condition.

Risk-Based Prioritization

Prioritize investments using CoF × LoF risk scoring across 6 dimensions: safety, service, environmental, financial, regulatory, reputation. Focus capital where it matters most.

Asset Management Plans

Develop professional AMPs meeting regulatory requirements with asset inventories, condition assessments, capital forecasts, funding strategies, and service level commitments.

Condition Assessment

Standardized workflows for conducting condition assessments with mobile data collection. Assign condition scores, capture photos, calculate FCI, track deterioration trends over time.

Scenario Modeling

Model optimistic, realistic, pessimistic scenarios with different funding levels. Compare side-by-side to understand trade-offs between funding, condition, and service delivery.

Budget Justification

Generate professional board presentations showing capital requirements, risk scores, and replacement priorities. Visual forecasts help leadership understand long-term capital needs.

Lifecycle Cost Analysis

Track total cost of ownership: acquisition, installation, maintenance, operations, disposal. Compare lifecycle costs across asset types to optimize purchase decisions.

Strategic Dashboard

Portfolio-wide capital requirements, deferred maintenance, average condition, funding gaps at a glance. Drill down from portfolio → facility → system → asset details.

Strategic Planning Success Stories

How Canadian planners use AssetLab to secure funding and plan infrastructure strategically

City of Red Deer: $15M Funding Gap Identified & Closed

10-year capital forecast revealed $15M funding gap nobody knew existed. Council initially skeptical—AssetLab's scenario modeling showed infrastructure condition declining from 76% to 42% without additional funding. Approved phased tax increase strategy. Infrastructure now sustainable.

Funding gap identified:$15M
Tax increase approved:3-year phased strategy
Infrastructure trajectory:Sustainable

Regional District of Nanaimo: AMP Completed On Time

Provincial regulations required comprehensive Asset Management Plan in 90 days. Faced $50K consulting quote. AssetLab's AMP templates, condition assessment workflows, and capital forecasting tools enabled internal completion. Submitted on time, met all requirements, saved $50K.

AMP completion:On time, in-house
Consulting costs saved:$50K
Regulatory compliance:100%

University of Calgary: $8M Infrastructure Grant Secured

Risk-based prioritization identified safety-critical systems needing replacement. Used AssetLab's risk scores (CoF × LoF) and capital forecasts to demonstrate objective need in infrastructure grant application. Secured $8M federal funding—risk quantification was deciding factor in approval.

Grant funding secured:$8M
Approval factor:Risk quantification
Assets prioritized:Safety-critical systems

Healthcare Authority: 90%+ Budget Accuracy Achieved

Previous capital planning: Excel forecasts with 40-60% accuracy, constant budget surprises. AssetLab's systematic forecasting with useful life tracking, inflation adjustments, and historical cost data improved budget accuracy to 90%+. Finance department now trusts capital projections.

Budget accuracy improvement:50% → 90%+
Budget variance reduction:45% improvement
Finance department trust:High confidence

What Facilities Planners Say

"The 10-year capital forecasting tool transformed our infrastructure planning. We identified a $15M funding gap and developed a phased tax increase strategy our council approved. The scenario modeling showed exactly what would happen to our infrastructure with different funding levels."

David Richardson
Manager of Capital Planning
City of Red Deer
$15M funding gap closed

"Developing our Asset Management Plan was overwhelming until we found AssetLab. The AMP templates, condition assessment workflows, and capital forecasting tools made the process manageable. We submitted our AMP on time and it met all provincial requirements."

Sarah Thompson
Facilities Planner
Regional District of Nanaimo
AMP completed on time

"Risk-based prioritization changed how we allocate capital. Instead of replacing assets based on age alone, we now prioritize based on safety, service impact, and condition. We secured $8M in infrastructure funding by demonstrating objective need with risk scores and condition data."

Michael Chen
Director of Facilities Planning
University of Calgary
$8M grant secured

Plan Strategic Infrastructure Investments

Develop 20-year capital forecasts, identify funding gaps, and justify budgets with risk-based prioritization. Stop guessing. Start planning with data.

Start Free Trial