Procurement Analysis · Cascade

Paint Reorder Analysis

Source: TrackVia — PO Header General · Window: Dec 15, 2025 – Jun 16, 2026 (trailing 6 months) · Prepared Jun 16, 2026

The concern is real and worth acting on. Painters running short on paint slows jobs, and a proposal has been raised to add 15% to paint quantity on every color to reduce reorders. This analysis looks at what the order history shows so we can land on the most effective fix.

What the data suggests: a flat 15% bump across every color is likely more than the pattern calls for. Paint is reordered on about 23.7% of orders (roughly 1 in 4), reorders are concentrated in a single high-volume supplier, and a portion stem from order-entry errors a quantity buffer wouldn't address. A more targeted approach should reduce shortages at lower cost — the rest of this report lays out where.

23.7%

Paint reorder rate (423 of 1,788 paint POs)

16.8%

Reorders as a share of paint dollars ($123K of $728K)

$109K

Cost of a 15% bump on all paint (6 mo) — vs. $123K total reorder spend

61%

of paint POs flow through one branch (SW American Fork)

1 · Paint type is not a factor

Both paint product lines reorder at essentially the same rate, so there is nothing to fix by switching or adjusting a specific type. Super Satin is the workhorse at ~93% of paint volume.

Paint type	Original items	Reorder items	Reorder share
Super Satin	3,033	671	18.1%
A-100 Satin	226	48	17.5%

2 · Reorders concentrate at one supplier — by volume, not by fault

Sherwin-Williams American Fork handles the majority of paint and therefore carries the majority of reorder dollars. Its reorder rate (19.5%) is below the 6-month average, so it isn't a uniquely bad vendor — it's simply where the volume is, which makes it the right place to tighten ordering practices.

Supplier	Paint POs	Reorders	Rate	Reorder $
SW – American Fork	1,093	213	19.5%	$91,083
SW – Ogden	136	31	22.8%	$7,310
SW – Washington	105	17	16.2%	$1,787
SW – St George	84	14	16.7%	$1,388
SW – Orem	63	18	28.6%	$2,955
SW – Spanish Fork	32	14	43.8%	$1,275
SW – Saratoga Springs	30	18	60.0%	$2,534
SW – Tooele	28	9	32.1%	$701
SW – Logan	27	6	22.2%	$1,618
SW – South Jordan	24	9	37.5%	$1,370
Cascade Warehouse	24	16	66.7%	$1,506
SW – Payson	23	14	60.9%	$1,592
SW – Riverton	20	6	30.0%	$616
SW – Heber	19	8	42.1%	$1,061
SW – Grand Junction, CO	19	5	26.3%	$3,494
SW – West Jordan	18	8	44.4%	$1,055

Showing branches with 15+ paint POs. Several very-low-volume branches show 100% rates on 1–3 orders — statistical noise, excluded from interpretation.

3 · A few small branches short far above average

Distinct from the volume story, these low-volume branches reorder 40–67% of the time. The dollars are small, but rates that high suggest a systematic under-ordering or process issue worth a direct look:

Branch	Paint POs	Reorder rate
Cascade Warehouse	24	66.7%
SW – Payson	23	60.9%
SW – Saratoga Springs	30	60.0%
SW – West Jordan	18	44.4%
SW – Spanish Fork	32	43.8%
SW – Heber	19	42.1%

4 · What a 15% bump would and wouldn't fix

A natural question is whether a 15% buffer simply pays for itself by eliminating reorders. The two are close in size — but they aren't interchangeable. A bump adds paint to every order; reorders happen on only about 1 in 4, and only the shortage portion could be prevented by ordering more up front.

Cost of a 15% bump — applied to all paint orders$109K

added paint cost (6 mo)

Current reorder spend — what we actually spend today$123K

$83K shortages

$40K plan errors / unlogged

Bump cost spreads across 100% of orders · Reorder spend a buffer could reduce (shortages) · Reorder spend a buffer can't touch

The 15% bump (~$109K / 6 mo) is about the size of all reorder spend, yet it could only ever offset the $83K shortage slice — and only partly, since it also lands on the ~76% of orders that never run short, where the extra paint becomes leftover. Reorder dollars buy paint that gets used on the job; bump dollars are spent up front whether the job needs them or not.

Breaking the $123K of six-month reorder spend down by reason:

Reorder reason