Reading a PCA report

ASTM E2018-24 sets no fixed format for a property condition report, or PCR; the user and the consultant settle it (E2018-24, 11.1). The guide does say what the PCR should contain, and takes it up in this order: writing protocols, documentation, an Executive Summary, purpose and scope, the walk-through survey, document reviews and interviews, additional considerations, qualifications, limiting conditions and exhibits (E2018-24, 11.2 to 11.11). Because the format is agreed for each engagement, look for this content whatever the headings are called.

How the PCR should be written

The guide's writing protocols call for these (E2018-24, 11.2):

For each material physical deficiency, a suggested remedy, which may be further research or testing (E2018-24, 11.2.1).
Where a deficiency's significance is not plain, an explanation a user can follow; naming a condition, such as aluminum distribution wiring, without saying why it matters may not be enough (E2018-24, 11.2.2).
A line between what the field observer knows firsthand and what others reported or documents showed, with the source of material information named (E2018-24, 6.3.2, 11.2.3).
Descriptions of systems and their condition may rest on extrapolation from representative observations (E2018-24, 11.2.4).

Condition ratings use defined terms. Good means working and needing no immediate or short-term repairs that cost more than an agreed threshold; fair means working but possibly needing them; poor means not working, or needing such repairs substantially above the threshold; other terms may be used if the PCR defines them; and where conditions are not uniform, the guide requires the report to explain the differences (E2018-24, 3.2.39.1 to 3.2.39.5).

The guide recommends pertinent documentation, with examples such as photographs, material building and fire department records, material code violation notices, certificates of occupancy, and repair cost documents from the owner, its representatives or contractors; photographs should be numbered and captioned (E2018-24, 11.3).

The Executive Summary

The guide gives the Executive Summary five parts (E2018-24, 11.4):

General description: the property's use, size, age, location and construction, the consultant, the user and the user's position, the transaction if known, the PCR's purpose and the site visit date (E2018-24, 11.4.1).
Findings and opinions: overall condition, the apparent level of preventive maintenance, material capital improvements pending, under way or recently done, and a schedule of physical deficiencies with suggested remedies and an opinion of cost (E2018-24, 11.4.2).
Deviations from this guide: each material deviation and deletion, listed separately, and each service beyond the baseline (E2018-24, 11.4.3). A user's change to the guide's cost thresholds is disclosed here too (E2018-24, 10.3.1).
Relationships: a relationship between the user and the consultant or field observer that is not at arm's length, and any case where the consultant, field observer, PCR reviewer or staff are employees or a subsidiary of the user (E2018-24, 7.3, 11.4.4).
Recommendations: the components and systems that need further study, testing, intrusive evaluation or probing; this part may also take up major departures from the property description the user gave and repairs under way (E2018-24, 11.4.5).

Purpose, scope and the survey

The purpose section states what the PCR is for and the user's position in the transaction, or says that the user did not disclose them (E2018-24, 11.5.1). The scope section names the improvements, outlines the work done and the methods, and identifies material deviations from the guide and any constraints that kept the consultant from following it (E2018-24, 11.5.2).

The walk-through survey section says which areas were surveyed and why they were chosen, and which were not available and the reasons given. It also gives a brief account of each system or component, any physical deficiencies observed, and material tenant-owned equipment outside the scope (E2018-24, 11.6).

Documents, interviews and sources

The document reviews and interviews section reports material information on physical deficiencies from those sources (E2018-24, 11.7). Other disclosures belong in the PCR as well: records that were not practically reviewable or came too late (E2018-24, 8.4.2), a user's direction to omit the pre-survey questionnaire or not to send it (E2018-24, 8.5), a significant discrepancy found in documents (E2018-24, 8.6), and interviews that could not be held, refusals and limited knowledge (E2018-24, 8.7.2).

Costs and further study

Cost opinions should be split into immediate costs and short-term costs, with long-term costs set apart when the report includes them (E2018-24, 10.3.7). They should be set out line by line, with approximate quantities, units and unit costs, or as a lump sum for a deficiency too complex for that method (E2018-24, 10.3.5). Where finding the right remedy needs more study, testing or probing, the PCR should give an opinion of the cost of that study (E2018-24, 10.3.6).

Additional considerations and limiting conditions

The PCR should identify any additional material considerations and any out-of-scope considerations it takes up (E2018-24, 11.8). The limiting conditions section describes every condition that limited observation of the improvements (E2018-24, 11.10), including access problems that were not cured (E2018-24, 5.3).

Qualifications and exhibits

The field observer and the PCR reviewer should each be named in the PCR, with a statement of qualifications for each (E2018-24, 7.1, 11.9). Where one person did both jobs, that person should say so and sign the PCR for both roles (E2018-24, 7.6). Exhibits include representative photographs, documents the user or owner submitted, and plot plans or sketches (E2018-24, 11.11). A pre-survey questionnaire, where one is used, should be an exhibit with its responses unless the user directs otherwise. If the user directs that it be left out of the PCR, or not be sent to the owner, the PCR should say so (E2018-24, 8.5).

Before relying on it

A PCR speaks for the point in time of its observations and research (E2018-24, 4.2.1). It answers the objectives the user gave the consultant, and the consultant should be consulted before it is used for another one (E2018-24, 4.2.3). Reliance by parties beyond those who contracted for it may be extended by mutual agreement of the contracting parties (E2018-24, 4.2.4). The PCR is an opinion, not a warranty of the property's condition or of its compliance with codes (E2018-24, 12.2).

This page is general reference. It does not assess any property. ASTM E2018-24 is the standard and is not reproduced here; the judgment of the consultant on the facts governs.