EXTERNAL CONVENIENCE OR INTERNAL RELIABILITY?
Should municipalities handle their own manhole rehabilitation projects? Municipalities across the United States and the world are asking this question. In the past, the answer may have been obvious—performing high-quality manhole repairs and protection required expensive materials and equipment, along with equally expensive training and certification. But now, with better, cheaper technology, municipalities can more easily and cost-effectively acquire everything they need to break their reliance on third-party contractors and start managing manhole rehabilitation in-house. Today, we’ll compare these two options to help you decide whether making the switch is right for your municipality.
IN-HOUSE VS. THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTORS
The only real similarity between in-house manhole rehabilitation and hiring outside contractors is that both aim to accomplish the same job. Who applies the coatings, how quickly the work gets done, how much it costs, and many other factors differ between the two. Here’s a comparison based on the top three factors for municipalities:
COST
The bottom line is the bottom line—municipalities rely on limited funding to support their operations, and few things take greater priority. Even though municipalities must make a modest upfront investment of time and money to build in-house capabilities, they can save significantly in the long run. They avoid material markups, labor costs, priority fees, and other expenses that come with third-party services. Once a municipality establishes its in-house capabilities, it controls manhole rehabilitation costs indefinitely.
SPEED
The sheer volume of work municipalities must handle makes it easy to fall behind, which can be a major problem for the populations they serve. If a municipal crew receives expert training and focuses on coatings-based projects, it can complete manhole rehabilitation far faster than outside contractors. But this requires commitment—poorly trained or under-equipped municipal crews may struggle to match the efficiency of professional coatings providers.
RELIABILITY
When municipalities take responsibility for servicing their own infrastructure, they control just about everything. They don’t have to hope private partners still deliver the same quality of service or worry about contractor availability. Municipal crews decide when and where their work is needed most and rely on their own resources to get the job done right. And you know what they say—if you want something done right, do it yourself!
OUR CONCLUSION
At the end of the day, both in-house manhole rehabilitation and third-party contractor services can meet a municipality’s needs. However, because in-house services reduce costs, increase speed, and improve reliability, most municipalities benefit from handling their own manhole rehabilitation projects. For this, polyurea remains a go-to technology, giving municipal crews a powerful tool for trenchless techniques that also protect other types of wastewater infrastructure.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Is In-House Or Externally Provided Manhole Rehabilitation Cheaper For Municipalities?
Over the long term, municipalities typically spend far less by developing in-house capabilities for manhole rehabilitation instead of hiring outside contractors. This approach eliminates extra costs from labor, material markups, and priority premiums, requiring only a modest upfront investment to train crews and acquire equipment.
Is Polyurea The Best Technology For Municipal Manhole Rehabilitation?
Polyurea stands out as the best—especially for municipal manhole rehabilitation! It works for trenchless manhole rehabilitation, a process that requires little to no excavation, making projects faster, easier, and more cost-effective while minimizing downtime. It also resists both chemical and mechanical stress and adapts to shifting surfaces commonly found in and around manholes.
What Is The Main Disadvantage To In-House Municipal Manhole Rehabilitation?
Managing manhole rehabilitation in-house offers numerous benefits, but it does come with challenges. Municipalities must invest significant time, money, and effort to purchase equipment, train and certify staff, and optimize operations, whereas third-party contractors remain just a phone call away.
