This document discusses public-private partnerships (P3s) for university housing. It begins with an agenda for the discussion, then provides a case study example. Some key points covered include the definition of a P3, potential pros and cons, university objectives for P3 projects, and various financing models. Advice is provided on promising practices, the roles of various campus stakeholders, and tips from both the university and developer perspectives on successful P3 collaborations.

1. PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
January 23, 2014

2. AGENDA
Experience in the Room
P3 Defined
Case Study
Pros
Cons
University Objectives
Financing Models
Promising Practices & Advice
ACUHO-I – 2

3. ACUHO-I – 3

4. 20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
MY OPINION OF P3 UNIVERSITY HOUSING
IS:
1. Excellent
2. Good
3. Neutral
4. Poor
5. Bad
January 23, 2014
1
2
3
4
5

5. I HAVE WORKED WITH A HOUSING P3:
50%
50%
1. Yes
2. No
1
January 23, 2014
2

6. IF “YES” MY HOUSING OPERATION
REPORTS THROUGH:
33%
33%
33%
1. Business/Finance
2. Student Affairs
3. Other
1
January 23, 2014
2
3

7. 20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
MY EXPERIENCE WITH P3 UNIVERSITY
HOUSING HAS BEEN:
1. Excellent
2. Good
3. Neutral
4. Poor
5. Bad
January 23, 2014
1
2
3
4
5

8. MY PARTICIPATION/ROLE IN THE
PROJECT BEGAN:
1. Pre-selection
2. During RFP
process
3. After Selection
4. V- not sure how
to phrase…
January 23, 2014
25%
1
25%
2
25%
3
25%
4

9. MY PARTICIPATION/ROLE:
33%
33%
33%
1. Selection
2. ……………..
3. Make it work
1
January 23, 2014
2
3

10. ACUHO-I – 10

11. WHAT
A public private partnership
(PPP, P3) is a government
(public) service or private
business venture which is
funded and operated through a
partnership of government
(public) and one or more
private sector companies.
ACUHO-I – 11

12. CASE STUDY
ACUHO-I – 12

13. CASE STUDY
Key Facts:
• Presidential Initiative
• Debt capacity constrained
• Sophomore Residency Req
• Occupancy- 100% on, Off-not full
• Athletic Director- unsatisfied on/looking off
• Current housing stock
• RH 1900+
• Suite 200…10%
• Apt O
Why Privatize?
 Market Based approach/product type
 Renovate/Replace
 Expand Suites
 Offer new apartments
 Combination
ACUHO-I – 13

14. CASE STUDY
ACUHO-I – 14

15. DEFINED
ACUHO-I – 15

16. WHERE
ACUHO-I – 16

17. P3=LOSS OF PROJECT
CONTROL
50%
50%
1. True
2. False
1
January 23, 2014
2

18. INSIDER INFO
ACUHO-I – 18

19. WHEN THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED THE
STUDENT/DEVELOPER RELATIONSHIP IS
OVER- WHEN THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED
THE UNIVERSITY/STUDENT
RELATIONSHIP BEGINS.
50%
50%
1. True
2. False
1
January 23, 2014
2

20. INSIDER INFO
ACUHO-I – 20

21. P3=LOWER
CONSTRUCTION
QUALITY
50%
50%
1. True
2. False
1
January 23, 2014
2

22. INSIDER INFO
ACUHO-I – 22

23. PRODUCT EVOLUTION
ACUHO-I – 23

24. ACUHO-I – 24

25. PROCESS - PROCUREMENT
ACUHO-I – 25

26. PRE-PROCUREMENT
ACUHO-I – 26

27. MOTIVATION
ACUHO-I – 27

28. DIVERSE UNIVERSITY OBJECTIVES
Lack of $
Preservation of debt capacity
Lower development cost
Lack of expertise
Faster delivery
Operational savings/efficiency
Potential revenue
Reduced liability
Expand land holdings
ACUHO-I – 28

29. WHY
ACUHO-I – 29

30. ACUHO-I – 30

31. WHAT DEVELOPERS NEED FROM INSTITUTIONS
Strong institutional leadership
Information to effectively evaluate options
Institutional strategic plan
Campus master plan
Capital improvement plan
Strategic housing plan
Housing facilities analysis
Res Life outcomes/assessment methods
ACUHO-I – 31

32. ACUHO-I – 32

33. FINANCIAL GOALS
ACUHO-I – 33

34. HOW TO DECIDE
ACUHO-I – 34

35. UNIVERSITY OBJECTIVES
ACUHO-I – 35

36. PROJECT FEASIBILITY
ACUHO-I – 36

37. TRANSACTION STRUCTURE & FINANCING ALTERNATIVES
General Obligation Bonds
• University ownership & risk
• Lowest cost of capital
• Direct debt of University
• Developer is service
provider
Taxable Project-Based Debt
• Developer takes construction
risk
• University and developer
share cash flow
• Long-term management
agreement
Tax-Exempt, Project-Based Bonds
• Use of a 501(c)3 foundation
• Cash flow to University
• Debt/credit impacts
Developer Equity
• Developer ownership & risk
• Ground rent to
University/Foundation
• Property tax implications
• Ownership/control vs. risk
assumption
ACUHO-I – 37

38. CHO ROLE
ACUHO-I – 38

39. Finance
Officers
•Key decision makers
Auxiliary
Services
•Access /Filter
•Informational resource
Student
Affairs
•Decision Maker
•Informational resource
• Access
Housing
Officer
•Client Relations
•Industry Credibility
Facilities
•Filter/Info/Evaluate
•Relationships/Credibility
Planning
Officers
•Info/Initial Docs
ACUHO-I – 39

40. ACUHO-I – 40

41. BONUS ADVICE
ACUHO-I – 41

42. 1 CAMPUS --- 1 DEVELOPER PERSPECTIVE
ACUHO-I – 42

43. CAMPUS/DEVELOPER PERSPECTIVE
ACUHO-I – 43

44. INITIAL OUTLINE- SEE NOTES- INFO ONLY-NOT FOR PRESENTATION
ACUHO-I – 44