Estimating and comparing maintenance costs for various flooring systems is always a challenge. Value judgments related to appearance are very subjective. Accepted appearance levels for facilities where maintenance costs are the primary concern may be completely unacceptable in a facility that demands a sanitized, sparkling representation. Comparing maintenance costs based on appearance between carpet and hard surfaces also can be quite unfair to hard surfaces because carpet does a commendable job of hiding soil accumulation. Any facility manager understands, when facility appearance is the primary issue, some hard surface flooring materials require a much more rigid maintenance regimen to obtain a comparable level appearance.
Another obstacle in comparing maintenance costs is rarely do maintenance staffs perform duties as they should be performed A number of studies and surveys comparing maintenance costs for various flooring systems have been completed over the past several years. In fact, a study always can be found that demonstrates a particular flooring system is cheaper to maintain that competing flooring systems. This is possible when a comparing a neglectful maintenance program to a superior program.
Two realistic studies include the 1990 BOMA Study which was a survey of facility managers throughout the country and the Carpax study which was an examination of school maintenance programs using International Sanitary Supply Association (ISSA) cleaning rates and frequencies. The CARPAX Study affords the easiest approach for facility managers to estimate maintenance costs for their facility.