Before a project even starts, most public-sector facilities leaders are operating under pressure:
U.S. schools face a ~$90 billion facilities funding gap across maintenance and capital needs.
The average school building in Arizona is 50 years old, forcing managers into constant repair cycles instead of planned upgrades. Many districts rely on “patchwork maintenance” just to stay operational
This means one thing: Facilities Managers are not starting from a clean slate, they’re already managing backlog, budget constraints, and political scrutiny.
In this environment, the relationship between the architect and the facilities manager becomes essential to the success of the project. Phasing strategies need to be built around real schedules, not ideal scenarios. Construction sequencing has to account for how campuses actually function day to day. Facilities managers bring a deep understanding of how the campus operates, including system history, recurring issues, and practical limitations. Our team brings design expertise, code knowledge, and long-term performance thinking. When those perspectives come together, projects are more likely to stay aligned with both vision and reality.
This collaboration also determines how well a building performs after construction is complete. Facilities teams are the ones who will operate and maintain the building for years to come. If systems are overly complex or poorly aligned with staff capabilities, long term performance suffers. Close coordination during design helps ensure that what gets built can actually be supported, maintained, and sustained over time.
The first step is simple but often overlooked.
Get involved before design decisions are locked in. Waiting until drawings are advanced limits the ability to influence outcomes. Early involvement allows facilities managers to share real operational insight, flag known issues, and shape decisions around phasing, access, and system selection before they become constraints.
Consistency matters just as much as timing.
Regular check-ins with the architect and broader design team create alignment and reduce surprises. These don’t need to be formal or time consuming, but they do need to happen often enough to keep everyone grounded in current campus conditions. When communication drops off, gaps form quickly, and those gaps usually show up later as costly problems.
Facilities managers should also bring their knowledge forward.
Walking the campus with the design team, pointing out recurring issues, and sharing maintenance history gives architects context they cannot get from drawings alone. This kind of hands on collaboration builds credibility and leads to better decisions.
Finally, trust is built through transparency.
Sharing constraints, whether they are budget limitations, staffing challenges, or political considerations, allows the architect to respond with solutions that are realistic and defensible. Holding back that information usually leads to misalignment and frustration on both sides. When that foundation is in place, projects are not only easier to manage, they deliver better outcomes for the schools they serve.