Universities' Facilities Planning Guide
•
2 likes•199 views
Facilities plays a key role in managing campus growth in ways that support the institution’s overall mission without over-extending available resources. Being able to prepare for the best while planning for the worst, while no easy feat, is essential in today’s rapidly changing marketplace. In this webinar, Sightlines outlines how using data-driven planning to create and communicate a clear vision of your campus facilities can ensure approval for the maintenance and capital projects required to set your campus ahead. What you'll learn: - How to better prioritize projects by using a portfolio framework - A new approach for performing facility assessments that institution stakeholders can act on with confidence - How to plan to meet future workforce challenges - Strategies for creating long-term facility plans that account for market volatility
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Universities' Facilities Planning Guide
Similar to Universities' Facilities Planning Guide (20)
More from Sightlines
More from Sightlines (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Universities' Facilities Planning Guide
- 1. 1
- 2. University of Nebraska Omaha University of New Brunswick University of New Hampshire University of New Haven University of New Mexico University of North Florida University of North Texas University of Northern Iowa University of Notre Dame University of Oregon University of Ottawa University of Pennsylvania University of Rhode Island University of Rochester University of San Diego University of San Francisco University of Saskatchewan University of South Florida University of Southern Maine University of Southern Mississippi University of St. Thomas University of Tennessee Health Science Center University of Tennessee, Knoxville University of Texas at Dallas University of the Sciences in Philadelphia University of Toledo University of Vermont University of Washington University of West Florida University of Wisconsin - Madison Vanderbilt University Virginia Commonwealth University Virginia Department of General Services Wake Forest University Washburn University Washington University in St. Louis Wellesley College Planning for the Future Adapting Facilities to Tomorrow’s Needs July 12, 2017
- 3. Today’s Speaker Jay Pearlman Associate Vice President, Sightlines • At Sightlines from it’s inception • 20-year industry expert • Played a leading role in the development of Sightlines’ services • Frequent speaker at industry events hosted by NACUBO, APPA, and AASHE • A regular contributor to industry publications • Graduate of Vassar College
- 4. Agenda • About Sightlines • Planning Challenges Facing Facilities Leaders Today • Strategies to Effectively Plan for the Future • Q&A
- 5. Join the Conversation 5 Enter questions here at any point during the webinar Presentation slides and webinar recording will be sent to each attendee following today’s session
- 6. Leading provider of facilities intelligence in higher education helping to uncover ways to use capital more strategically and identify opportunities to improve operational effectiveness.
- 7. Sightlines by the Numbers Robust membership includes colleges, universities, consortiums, and state systems 43 States+DC 90% Member retention rate 335+ ROPA Members 450 Colleges & Universities 170 New members since 2013 5 Canadian provinces Sightlines has advised state systems in: • Alaska • California • Florida • Hawaii • Maine • Massachusetts • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Nebraska • New Hampshire • New Jersey • Pennsylvania • Texas • Washington 52k buildings
- 8. © 2017 Sightlines, LLC. All Rights Reserved.8 Sightlines is a Gordian Company Data, software, and expertise for all phases of The Building Lifecycle
- 9. Planning for the Future Download a copy today http://www.sightlines.com/insight/planning-for-the-future/
- 10. Before the Roof Caves In Source: “Before the Roof Caves In II,” published with assistance from APPA and Stanford University Rick Biedenwig, 1980 Founder, Pacific Partners Consulting Group “One side effect of this rapid growth has been the creation of an increasingly large obligation for the future renewal and replacement of the physical plant.”
- 11. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% Sightlines Database- Construction Age Built pre-1951 • Durable construction • Older but lasts longer 11 Putting Your Campus Building Age in Context Campus age drives overall risk profile %ofConstructedSpace Pre-War Built 1951 - 1975 • Lower quality • Needs more repairs & renovation 1975 - 1990 • Quick flash construction • Low quality components Built post-1991 • Technically complex • Higher quality • More expensive to maintain or repair Modern Post War Complex
- 12. 12 Facilities Backlogs Continue to Rise $81.72 $83.42 $87.19 $88.52 $90.73 $93.27 $95.31 $97.56 $100.07 $0.0 $20.0 $40.0 $60.0 $80.0 $100.0 $120.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 $/GSF Backlog $/GSF The Sightlines backlog total includes maintenance/repair, modernization and infrastructure
- 13. 13 Facilities Backlogs Continue to Rise $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 $/GSF Public Institutions The Sightlines backlog total includes maintenance/repair, modernization and infrastructure $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 $/GSF Private Institutions
- 14. Replace air compressors and steam stop valves “Capital Planning is more than just a project list.” Upgrade all heat detectorsCosmetic Repair of Student Apartments. Bathroom Upgrades Replace Doors Experience Tells Us… Install new sprinklers
- 15. Traditional Facilities Assessment Should I Complete a Facilities Assessment? Technical Assessment Project Selection Misses opportunities to optimize capital resources Fails to harness operating knowledge Doesn’t tie to mission Ignores financial capacity
- 16. Making the Backlog Actionable Understand the cause of deferral and slow backlog accumulation 3 Stop the Bleeding 42 Create building portfolios Make the Problem Smaller Create multi-year plans Sustain Impact of Finite Funding Target capital to reliability, safety/code, critical asset preservation Mitigate Risk 1 • Trying to compel action through a daunting DM figure does not work. It freezes decision making and compounds the core issue. • Facilities leaders need to:
- 17. $0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0 $35.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 MILLIONS Total Capital Investment vs. Funding Target Annual Stewardship Asset Reinvestment Annual Investment Target Life Cycle Need 17 Fix the Cause – Not Just the Symptom Increasing Backlog & Risk Increasing Net Asset Value Lowering Risk Profile
- 18. Multi-year Capital Investment Plan Building Portfolio Creation • Group buildings • Outline investment strategy Funding Identification • What financial resources are available? Funding Allocation • By portfolio • By investment criteria Project Identification • Inventories • Interviews • Other studies Project Codification • Timeframe • Package • Investment criteria Project Selection • Project scores • Meet investment objectives The “Bottom-Up, Top-Down” Approach Technical Strategic
- 19. Tie the Inventory to Operations and Mission Facilities Meetings Organized by Trades Meet with University Staff to Identify Programmatic Needs and Funding Two sets of meetings that run concurrently…
- 20. Develop Building Portfolios Developing a portfolio approach will allow for a focused investment approach based on the Institutional Strategic Direction. • Building Age • Building Condition • Building Location • Institutional focus • Academic requirements • Student needs • Historical Significance • Safety/Code requirements • Recruitment/Retention • Transitional Space • Adaptive Reuse Core considerations to the portfolio approach • Institutional Priorities • Building Needs • Future Campus Direction Institutional Leaders for buy in and communication Not all buildings are created equal WHY? HOW? WHO?
- 21. Total Needs $165.4M Transitional Buildings $35.2M 174,284 GSF $202/GSF Grounds/ Infrastructure $15.3M Building Needs $114.8M Core Academic $34.0M 539,944 GSF $63/GSF Student Life $30.1M 392,533 GSF $77/GSF Residence Halls $21.9M 215,279 GSF $102/GSF Historic Preservation $14.9M 87,281 GSF $170/GSF Campus Perimeter $14.0M 116,172 GSF $121/GSF Example #1: Functional Portfolios Buildings are divided by both use and type
- 22. Total Needs $144.3M Parking $3.9M 1,1M GSF $3.6/GSF Grounds/ Infrastructure $14M Building Needs $110.5M Beneficial $41.8M 977K GSF $43/GSF Legacy $29M 574,368 GSF $34/GSF Millennium $28.1M 1.8M GSF $15.5/GSF Transitional $19.5M 240K GSF $81/GSF Rental $7.2M 96K GSF $75/GSF 22 Example #2: Longevity Portfolios based upon building use
- 23. Total Needs $253.9M New Construction $83.3M Grounds/ Infrastructure $11.3M Building Needs $158.3M Institutionally Funded Academic $42.7M Administrative $18.9M Science/Research $33.9M Athletic $11.6M Residence Halls $18.0M Faculty Staff & Housing $10.9M Fraternities & Sororities $9.0M Transitional $14.2M Potential Grants Potential Gifts Potential to Sell Potential Grants Example #3: Blended Functional and Funding Portfolios Aligning needs with funding opportunities Focus investment into core campus facilities that are unlikely to receive donor funding
- 24. Example #4: Balancing Needs & Program Value
- 25. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Net Asset Value Index Academic Admin & Support Athletics Residence Student Life Transitional Understanding the Net Asset Value Index NAV Index = (Replacement Value-Building Needs) Replacement Value X 100 Investment Strategy 100% - 85% 85%- 75% 75%- 60% Belo w 60% Capital Upkeep Stage: Primarily new or recently renovated buildings w/ sporadic building repair & life cycle needs; “You pick the projects” Repair and Maintain Stage: Buildings are beginning to show their age and may require more significant investment on a case-by-case basis Systemic Renovation Stage: Buildings may require more significant repairs ; large-scale capital infusions/ renovations are inevitable; “The projects pick you” Transitional/Gut Renovation/Demo Stage: Major buildings components are in jeopardy of complete failure. Reliability issues are widespread throughout the building. NAV of Index Technical Assessment Step1: Integration of Capital Needs Step 2: Create Building Portfolios Step3: Develop Multi-year Capital Plan Step 4: Project Selection
- 26. What is the Impact? Highlight Value of Each Project Define Work Classification • Repair/Maintenance • Modernization • Infrastructure Define Project Timeframe • A: 1-3 Years • B: 4-7 Years • C: 8 -10 Years • X: Beyond 10 Years Define Project Classifications • Reliability • Asset preservation • Program improvement • Economic operations • Safety/Code What is the Work? What is the Impact? When should the work be done?
- 27. Academic / Admin Student Life Repair Infrastructure Renovation Houses $20M Plan $ 2,118,600 $ 4,891,000 $ 7,555,600 $ 1,384,700 $ - $ 271,514 $25M Plan $ 3,368,600 $ 6,540,600 $ 8,055,600 $ 1,734,700 $ - $ 319,094 $30M Plan $ 3,497,100 $ 7,754,900 $ 7,555,600 $ 2,055,800 $ 3,405,555 $ 819,094 $(1) $- $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 Millions $20M Plan $25M Plan $30M Plan Acad/Admin Student Life Repair Infrastructure Renovation Houses Planning Options Summary Portfolios
- 28. Select Projects that Support Plan Full Inventory of Projects Apply Building Portfolio & Timeframe Apply Investment Criteria & Timeframe Multi-Year Project Plan Geographic, Program, Transitional, & Years Reliability, Asset Preservation, Program, Economic Operations, Safety/Code & Years ProposedSolution Electrical, Plumbing, HVAC, Mechanical, Exterior, Interior, Safety… How Do You Target Projects Full Inventory of Projects Electrical, Plumbing, HVAC, Mechanical, Exterior, Interior, Safety… ? CurrentChallenge Pick Projects
- 29. Tips for Communicating the Plan to Leadership Don’t provide an overwhelming list of needs without a framework Don’t get caught up in specific technical details Don’t turn your list of conditions over to someone else & move on Don’t deliver the list as an ultimatum Do make sure your list is framed and targeted Do gather details, but focus on the macro level and outcomes Do stay involved and work with stakeholders throughout Do recognize there will be continual prioritization
- 30. Articulate the Cause of Backlogs Communicate a Credible Inventory of Need Create a Process; Don’t Just Pick Projects Measurable Performance 30 • Catch-up vs. Keep-up • Understand how underfunding creates backlog • Impact of changing campus age . • Comprehensive, credible, and flexible • Illustrate operations impact • Benchmarking for context • Building Portfolios reflect institutional strategy • Investment Criteria define the investment outcome • Timeframe – aligns financial capacity to facilities needs . • Fact: Never get enough funding • Fact: Emergencies arise so contingency management is key • Fact: Customer support is important Conclusion • The Successful Plan Will:
- 31. Update the Plan as Needed Facilities Assessment & Planning Process Codify The Needs Create Strategy Allocate Resources Select the Project Execute the Project Monitor Progress New Goals or Priorities Define Existing Needs
- 32. Read the Full Guide For… Download a copy today http://www.sightlines.com/insight/planning-for-the-future/ • Meeting Future Workforce Challenges • Building Flexibility into Long-Term Planning
- 34. Please take our survey to help us improve our webinars.
- 35. 35 Thank you for your time.