THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK

FACILITIES MASTER PLAN

Presented by the

State University Construction FundPPAA Winter Conference

January 31, 2012

1

“Plans are nothing; planning is everything.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower

2

In 2009, the Fund commissioned consultants to undertake facilities master planning on 32 campuses simultaneously, within a fixed budget and fixed schedule.

The Facilities Master Plans (FMPs) were completed on time and under budget, and have transformed the way we integrate academic and facilities condition needs in capital planning.

The FMPs are not the next capital plan, but are our road map to applying capital resources to their highest and best use.

The purpose of the FMPs is to identify, prioritize, and sequence future construction projects that support the academic mission of SUNY and its member colleges.

3

FACILITIES MASTER PLAN – INITIATIVE:

SYSTEM-WIDE TRENDS:

4

Demographics & Enrollment

Facility Conditions

Facility Needs

SUNY Space Guidelines

FMP Budget

5

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 20220

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

NYS HS Grad Projections

HS Grads to Higher Ed. Total

HS Grads to NYS Higher Ed.

SUNY Share of HS Grads

HS Grads to State Ops Only

Sources: WICH -"Knocking at the College Door"NYSED, ORIS - Dec 2011US Dept Ed. NCES 2011-12

System Wide Trends: DEMOGRAPHICS

High School Graduation - Demographics

System Wide Trends: DEMOGRAPHICS Declining NYS HS grad. rates due to falling birth rates

Upstate versus downstate demographics

Loss of State Ops market share to Comm. Colleges

Students leaving ‘Privates’ due to affordability

Education Pipeline increasing yield

Out-of-State Students

International students

Non-traditional learners

6

7

COMPETITION – NYS HIGHER EDUCATION

2000 2005 2010 -

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Private CollegesSUNY Community CollegesSUNY State OpsCUNYPropriety Colleges

Historical Enrollment trends – First Time/Full Time Freshman enrollment

System-Wide Trends: FMP ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS Majority of SUNY Campuses aspire to grow

Growth rates vary by sector

Most campuses plan to recruit from downstate

Projected growth versus declining NYS demographic

Strong internal competition for students is expected

Affordability of growth, allocation of resources & budget

8

FMP ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

9

Base 2012 2013 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022140,000

150,000

160,000

170,000

180,000

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

FMP Projected total SUNY State Ops

Total Enrollment tracking Demographics

In aggregate, SUNY State Ops, in the FMP, aspire to grow by 39,000

If State Ops enrollment follows Demographics, total enrollment may decline by 36,000

System Wide Trends: FACILITY CONDITIONS FMP Consultants conducted building condition

assessments as part of their scope of services

Update of the BCAS was not part of the FMP

The FMP confirmed the validity of 2007 BCAS methodology

Results of 2011 survey and backlog reduction

40% of the current 5-year CM plan has not yet hit construction

10

11

2007-08 Backlog 2011-12 Estimated Backlog + Escalation

2011-12 Actual and Reduced backlog

$-

$0.50 B

$1.00 B

$1.50 B

$2.00 B

$2.50 B

$3.00 B

$3.50 B

$4.00 B

$4.50 BBCAS & Backlog Reduction

2007 BCAS Backlog Brought Forward

2007 BCASBacklog

$2.46B$2.46B

12

2007-08 Backlog 2011-12 Estimated Backlog + Escalation

2011-12 Actual and Reduced backlog

$-

$0.50 B

$1.00 B

$1.50 B

$2.00 B

$2.50 B

$3.00 B

$3.50 B

$4.00 B

$4.50 BBCAS & Backlog Reduction

2007 BCASBacklog

2007 BCASBacklog

New Back-log and

Cost Esca-lation

$2.46B $2.46B

$1.69B

13

2007-08 Backlog 2011-12 Estimated Backlog + Escalation

2011-12 Actual and Reduced backlog

$-

$0.50 B

$1.00 B

$1.50 B

$2.00 B

$2.50 B

$3.00 B

$3.50 B

$4.00 B

$4.50 BBCAS & Backlog Reduction

2007 BCASBacklog

2007 BCASBacklog

New Back-log and

Cost Esca-lation

2011 BCAS Preliminary Assessment

$2.46B

$1.69B

$2.46B $2.42B

14

2007-08 Backlog 2011-12 Estimated Backlog + Escalation

2011-12 Actual and Reduced backlog

$-

$0.50 B

$1.00 B

$1.50 B

$2.00 B

$2.50 B

$3.00 B

$3.50 B

$4.00 B

$4.50 B

BCAS and Backlog Reduction

New Backlog and Cost Es-

calation

2007 BCASBacklog

2007 BCASBacklog

2011 BCAS Preliminary Assessment

Estimated Back-log Reduction of

$1.73B

$1.69B

$2.46B $2.46B $2.42B

Consultant observations during execution of FMP:

PSI records generally in poor condition Lack of course & section analysis system – classroom use SUNY Space Guidelines - obsolete Classroom and Lab station sizes don’t support problem

based learning Research Space allocation/modeling is obsolete Modern student expectations of student life have changed Evolution of libraries - less books, more collaborative learning

space 15

System Wide Trends: SUNY SPACE GUIDELINES & PSI

Consultant recommendations:

Overhaul, update & simplify SUNY Space Guidelines

Overhaul PSI, adopt FICM and Federal Standards

Drop (arbitrary) 18% DOB utilization premium

Develop goals/standards for research space

Acknowledge changes in pedagogy

Better serve student services & student activity spaces

16

System Wide Trends: SUNY SPACE GUIDELINES & PSI

Provide Facilities to accommodate growth & change Address building flexibility & adaptability issues Adapt classroom inventories for current pedagogy Adapt to evolving libraries & learning spaces Grow research & link to economic development Provide one-stop student service centers Better serve Intercollegiate athletics & recreation Support recruitment and retention efforts

17

System Wide Trends: FACILITY NEEDS

$23 Million Statewide FMP Budget generated $26 Billion in planned projects through 2023 and beyond

FMP provides a toolkit for program-driven capital needs

This year’s capital planning process will integrate pure CM needs

18

System Wide Trends: FMP BUDGET

FMP Budget

2013-2018FMP Budget2018-2023

FMP Budget2023 and beyond Totals

University Centers & other Doctoral 5.8 4.8 7.0 17.6

Comprehensives 2.4 2.4 .9 5.7Tech Sector 1.1 1.0 .6 2.7

Totals 9.3 8.2 8.5 26.0

19

System Wide Trends: SUMMARY Most campuses aspire to grow

Demographic conditions are not favorable

There will be strong internal and external competition for students

Growth may need to be strategic

Capital resources must be applied to highest and best use

Effective planning is essential

University CentersComprehensive CollegesTechnology Colleges

20

TRENDS BY SECTOR:

19% average projected enrollment

growth. (11.1% without B.U)

Overall average growth rate skewed

by Binghamton University planned

aggressive growth

Most of the growth rate is still

planned to be NYS HS graduates

University Centers recruit

proportionally more students out of

state and internationally

21

University Centers: FMP ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

Base 2013 2018 202370,000

75,000

80,000

85,000

90,000

95,000

100,000

University CentersWithout Binghamton

Allocation of space for research

Strong need for integrated research facilities

Space needs for Division I athletics and recreation

Economies of scale – generally better building conditions

Larger capital plans - numerous full building renovations

Site infrastructure problems remain

22

University Centers: UNIQUE ISSUES

University Centers:

23

24

Comprehensive Colleges: FMP ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

Average Projected Growth 7.9% (Empire State excluded)

Campuses in largest metro areas plan strongest growth rates

Established, reputable specialty programs attract and retain students

Base 2013 2018 20230

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Enrollment Projections

SUNY Space Guidelines more closely represent Comprehensive Colleges

Adequate space to support renovations

Transitions in use of class labs

Emerging changes in research

Historic preservation issues – “Old Mains”

Improve and expand recreation facilities for non-athletes

Consolidate academic program spaces

Establish one-stop service centers25

Comprehensive Colleges: UNIQUE ISSUES

Comprehensive Colleges:

26

Average Projected Enrollment Growth of 25%

Continued development of baccalaureate programs

Desired increased selectivity

Majority of student population is recruited regionally

Goals: increase number of transfer students from community colleges and increase range of recruitment

Greater % of first-generation, college-bound students

27

Technology Colleges: FMP ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

Base 2013 2018 20230

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Enrollment Projections

Relatively higher deferred maintenance backlog

Smaller campuses lack flexibility to implement renewal

Higher ASF/ FTE ratio - specialty “hands-on” programs & smaller classes

Traditional and unique learning environments & non-standard scheduling

Technology colleges are inadequately served by outdated space factors for support space

28

Technology Colleges: UNIQUE ISSUES

Expansion into 4-year institution - Student Unions, Recreation and Athletic facilities

Vocational education & public / private partnering often use non-state owned facilities

With enrollment growth, need for increased residential facilities

Critical maintenance allocations are challenging for technology colleges

29

Technology Colleges: UNIQUE ISSUES

Technology Colleges:

3030

FMP FUTURE:

31

The Facility Master Plan has acknowledged each

institution’s mission, strategic vision, and projected growth

assessments.

It has crafted a facility planning document to assist in guiding

the institution in developing a prioritized capital plan

maximizing capital expenditures meeting both academic

mission objectives and stewardship responsibilities,

supporting both growth and facility renewal.

32

Thank You!

Questions

33