CAMS
CAMS Predictive · Deterioration prediction and budgeting

Predict asset needs before they become funding problems.

CAMS moves asset owners from static registers to predictive, evidence-based capital planning. It forecasts how assets degrade, estimates future renewal and maintenance cost, and lets you defend funding decisions with clear, scenario-based evidence, combining condition, risk, criticality and lifecycle cost with deterioration modelling.

900+
Asset-specific deterioration curves
1 to 5
Condition states modelled
25 yr
Forecast horizon
3
Cost streams: capital, planned, reactive
Why CAMS Predictive

Four questions, answered with evidence

A static register records what assets exist today. CAMS predicts what they are likely to need tomorrow, what it will cost, and what happens if the investment is deferred.

What deteriorates first, and when?

Predict deterioration

Asset-specific deterioration curves forecast the probability of each asset moving through condition states over time, so the assets needing attention surface first.

How much funding is required?

Forecast the funding

Predictions become capital, planned and reactive forecasts across a 10 to 25-year horizon, showing where budget pressure occurs and what is driving it.

What risk if we defer?

Defend the decision

Scenario and criticality modelling show the cost and risk of deferral, producing defensible evidence for a funding submission, not just an assertion that more is needed.

The module

From asset data to investment decisions

CAMS connects asset data, condition, risk, cost and deterioration modelling into one decision-support environment, from a single curve to a portfolio funding case.

Predictive deterioration modelling

From asset age to predicted condition

Design life is not a guaranteed failure date. More than 900 asset-specific curves forecast the probability of an asset moving through each condition, adjusted for its actual condition, environment and utilisation.

  • 900+ asset-specific deterioration curves
  • Probability across condition states 1 to 5
  • Adjusted for environment, exposure and criticality
See the demonstration
Screenshot · Degradation curves
assets/screenshots/predictive-curves.png
Lifecycle forecasting & budget

From condition to a defensible budget

Deterioration predictions convert into capital, planned and reactive forecasts, then run against available funding to expose the years where renewals cluster and the budget cannot meet demand.

  • Capital, planned and reactive cost projections
  • Forecast demand against available funding
  • Cumulative position, backlog and protected works
See budget management
Screenshot · Budget management
assets/screenshots/predictive-forecast.png
Scenario & criticality

Compare strategies, prioritise by consequence

Test conservative, standard and run-to-fail strategies, and view the same forecast through criticality, so investment is directed by consequence of failure, not by treating every asset equally.

  • Conservative, standard and run-to-fail strategies
  • Cost, risk and useful-life comparison
  • Expenditure separated by criticality
See scenarios
Screenshot · Scenario comparison
assets/screenshots/predictive-scenario.png
The predictive engine

What sits behind the forecast

The modelling that turns an asset register into a long-term investment plan, built on research-based deterioration curves and the governed CAMS data.

Predictive deterioration modelling

More than 900 asset-specific, research-based curves forecast the probability of moving through each condition, not a single replacement date.

The core

Lifecycle cost forecasting

Capital, planned and reactive expenditure projected across a 10, 20 or 25-year horizon, at portfolio, site or asset level.

Capital planning

Scenario comparison

Conservative, standard, run-to-fail and budget-constrained strategies compared for cost, risk and useful life.

What-if

Intervention timing analysis

Shows that deferral changes the scope, cost and risk of an intervention, not just the year it lands in.

Cost of delay

Budget gaps and funding evidence

Forecast demand against available funding, with cumulative position and a defensible case for a funding submission.

Defensible

Criticality-based prioritisation

Investment directed by consequence of failure, protecting safety, compliance and essential services while deferring lower-criticality assets.

Risk-ranked
The difference, row by row

Static asset register versus CAMS Predictive

CapabilityStatic asset registerCAMS Predictive
Replacement basisAge and design lifePredicted condition and deterioration
Failure forecastingNot modelled900+ deterioration curves
Cost viewA single totalCapital, planned and reactive
Budget versus fundingSeparate spreadsheetModelled against the forecast
Strategy testingManual, if at allScenario comparison
Funding caseAssertionEvidence-based and defensible
Designed for

Asset-intensive organisations

Suited to organisations managing large, complex or high-value asset portfolios that need to justify future funding and explain asset risk.

Local government
State government agencies
Universities
Hospitals and health networks
Justice and custodial facilities
Transport and road authorities
Facilities management providers
PPP operators and infrastructure owners
Get started

See CAMS on a nominated pilot site

CAMS is released to a pilot site for an initial term, then monitored and refined to support the contract. Model deterioration and budget on your own portfolio from there.

Request demo