Facility Level Resilience: Property Condition, Resource Efficiency, and Climate Impacts

The built environment is increasingly exposed to risks stemming from climate impacts and evolving market expectations that are demanding more than what traditional pre-investment due diligence is providing. As these risks escalate, the need for robust, forward-looking, asset/facility assessments become more critical for maintaining and protecting business operations. A recent solution for this need is the Property Resilience Assessment (PRA) – a newly formalized framework developed by ASTM International that merges a traditional Property Condition Assessment (PCA) with a physical climate risk assessment.

The PRA standard provides a more holistic view of a physical asset by evaluating both existing facility conditions (e.g., structural integrity and system performance) alongside projected vulnerabilities from climate hazards such as extreme heat, flooding, severe storms, and sea-level rise. This evolution in due diligence has been catalyzed by the increasing frequency and intensity of climate-related impacts, which have exposed the physical and financial vulnerabilities of physical assets/facilities. These hazards can result in direct damage to facilities, prolonged business interruptions, higher operating costs, and diminished asset values. As such, understanding asset/facility resilience is no longer a nice-to-have – it’s a necessity for managing long-term performance and mitigating future liability. We are seeing increased pressure in the marketplace to not only identify these risks but to actively integrate resiliency into acquisition, development, and operational strategies. (Check out our recent white paper on physical climate risk assessments to learn more – Bridge House Advisors | You’re Doing Due Diligence, but are You Being Diligent?)

The PRA seeks to address these needs by offering stakeholders a framework to better understand the exposure and resilience of individual assets. However, while this framework represents a notable step forward for the industry, it still has its limitations – most notably, its scope is confined to single-site assessments, which reduces its effectiveness for our clients investing in or maintaining large and geographically diverse portfolios.

Recognizing these needs long before the PRA standard entered the market, Bridge House Advisors pioneered a more expansive and integrated due diligence approach. This approach led to the development and branding of a Facility Sustainability Assessment (FSA), a comprehensive tool that combines the rigor of a facility condition evaluation (FCE), a physical climate risk analysis, and an energy performance evaluation. The Bridge House FSA product not only assesses the physical condition of assets but also identifies where operational and climate related risks exist, what potential energy saving opportunities are present, and how these factors influence the overall performance of a portfolio.

The FSA is part of Bridge House’s broader integrated due diligence services, which include environmental due diligence, ESG due diligence, and facilities due diligence. Together, these services deliver a 360-degree view of asset performance, resilience, compliance, and liability. Unlike traditional due diligence approaches that address these domains in isolation (and often via multiple advisors), Bridge House integrates these workstreams into a single, cohesive process. This approach improves efficiency and ensures a more strategic, complete, and insightful understanding of potential risks and opportunities.

One of the key differentiators of the Bridge House FSA is its inclusion of a portfolio-wide energy assessment, which is not part of a standard PRA. This innovation evaluates the current energy performance of each site within the portfolio, identifies operational inefficiencies, and highlights opportunities for utility savings. More importantly, our methodology is not focused on assessing individual assets—it evaluates the entire portfolio to identify which sites hold the greatest potential for energy performance improvement. This allows our clients to prioritize fast and less expensive operational and maintenance changes, followed by targeted equipment upgrades, which maximizes savings and optimizes resource allocation across their facility portfolio.

The graph below demonstrates the strategic value of conducting a portfolio-wide energy assessment. By plotting each site’s energy intensity against the portfolio average, it becomes immediately apparent which sites are underperforming and which might contribute best practices at a portfolio level. This visual prioritization enables our clients to target high-impact opportunities for energy performance improvement—focusing resources where they will yield the greatest return in terms of utility cost savings and operational efficiency.

Bridge House’s energy strategy is centered on identifying scalable solutions without a significant upfront capital investment. By focusing on the facilities with the greatest opportunities, we help clients reduce energy spend where it matters most. These improvements are then scaled across the broader portfolio, creating a compounding effect that enhances EBITDA, strengthens net operating income, and increases asset value. In a market where even modest efficiency gains can shift investment outcomes, our portfolio-level approach delivers significant business value.

Case Study: A recent Facility Sustainability Assessment (FSA) conducted by Bridge House for a portfolio of six geographically diverse manufacturing facilities illustrates the value of this service offering. The assessment evaluated exposure to physical climate risks—such as water stress, flooding, wildfires, seismic activity, and cyclones—identifying medium water supply risk at four sites and high cyclone risk at another. These insights enabled the client to proactively address vulnerabilities through a combination of operational adjustments and infrastructure upgrades. People-related risks were also assessed, including emergency preparedness, life safety systems, heat stress, and accessibility. Two sites presented medium risk for heat stress, prompting suggestions for workforce safety measures such as cooling stations and revised work protocols. The energy assessment identified one facility operating at an energy intensity 43% above the portfolio average, identifying it as a high-priority candidate for efficiency improvements through low-cost operational and maintenance measures. If brought in line with the portfolio average, this site alone could yield an estimated $125,000 in annual utility cost savings. Additionally, achieving a modest 20% reduction in utility expenditures across the remaining sites—well within reach through similar low-cost interventions—would result in over $300,000 in total annual utility savings across the portfolio. Together, these improvements represent a significant EBITDA lift. Finally, the property condition evaluation identified over $2 million in projected capital replacement needs across the portfolio over a 10-year period, supporting informed investment planning and risk mitigation. By leveraging an estimated $3 million in cumulative utility cost savings over the same timeframe, the client is positioned to reinvest in higher-efficiency systems for energy consuming end-of-life components – avoiding standard like-for-like / run-to-fail replacements and compounding long-term cost savings.

Bridge House offers a uniquely comprehensive and insightful approach to asset risk and climate and energy assessments. Our integrated methodology, deep expertise, and portfolio-level perspective equip our clients with the tools they need to not only comply with emerging requirements and expectations, but to lead with confidence in an uncertain world. We don’t just help clients adapt — we help them thrive.

Learn more about our Pre-Investment Due Diligence Services – Bridge House Advisors | Pre-Investment Due Diligence Services