Preventative Maintenance Program
How Preventative Maintenance Reduced Roofing Costs by 75%
EPS was spending $950,000 annually on reactive roofing. A Heartland maintenance program built on documented condition data reduced that spend to $235,000, without replacing a single roof prematurely.
[Client quote pending]
Facilities Director, EPS
The situation
Reactive roofing at $950,000 a year, with no end in sight.
EPS managed a large multi-building portfolio with annual roofing costs approaching $1 million. The pattern was entirely reactive: leaks would appear, contractors would be called, patches would be applied, and the same buildings would appear on the following year's emergency list.
The underlying problem was the absence of condition data. Without a documented baseline for each roof, there was no way to forecast spend, prioritize work, or challenge contractor recommendations. Every decision was reactive because there was no proactive framework to work from.
What others recommended
Full replacement of the portfolio. No conditions data to support it.
The contractor recommendation presented to EPS called for systematic replacement of the entire portfolio over a three-year period. The estimated capital outlay was significant. The recommendation was based on membrane age and visual condition scoring, with no thermal imaging and no moisture mapping.
Age-based replacement recommendations benefit the contractor. They do not require investigation, and they generate large projects. An independent assessment requires the same investigation that reveals whether replacement is actually needed.
What Heartland found
Most roofs rated good-to-fair. None required immediate replacement.
The portfolio assessment scored every roof by section using a documented condition matrix. Thermal imaging was used where membrane condition was ambiguous. Core samples validated anomalies.
The finding: the majority of the portfolio was in good-to-fair condition with years of remaining serviceable life. A targeted maintenance program addressing deteriorating flashings, failed sealants, and isolated moisture areas would eliminate the reactive work cycle without any premature replacements.
A five-year capital projection was built from the condition data and presented alongside the maintenance program recommendations. EPS had a documented basis for every capital decision for the first time.
The outcome
$235,000 per year. A 75% reduction in annual roofing spend.
Annual roofing spend dropped from $950,000 to $235,000. The $715,000 annual saving is documented across multiple budget cycles. The 15:1 ROI is calculated against the program fee.
The reactive work cycle ended. Buildings no longer recur on emergency lists because the maintenance program addresses developing conditions before they become failures.
EPS now has a five-year capital forecast that is defensible to auditors and procurement oversight. Every dollar spent is traceable to a condition-data finding.
Next step
Turn your roofing budget from reactive to managed.
A documented maintenance program starts with a condition assessment. The savings are repeatable.