The State University of New York Facilities Master Plan

1. The State University of New YorkFacilities Master Plan Presented by the State University Construction Fund PPAA Winter Conference January 31, 2012

2. “Plans are nothing; planning is everything.” Dwight D. Eisenhower

3. Facilities Master Plan – Initiative: 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.

4. System-Wide Trends: • Demographics & Enrollment • Facility Conditions • Facility Needs • SUNY Space Guidelines • FMP Budget

5. System Wide Trends: Demographics High School Graduation - Demographics

6. 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

7. Competition – NYS Higher Education Historical Enrollment trends – First Time/Full Time Freshman enrollment

8. 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

9. FMP Enrollment Projections

10. 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

11. $2.46B $2.46B 2007 BCAS Backlog

13. $1.69B $2.46B $2.46B $2.42B

14. $2.46B $2.46B $2.42B

15. System Wide Trends: • SUNY Space Guidelines & PSI 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

16. 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

17. System Wide Trends: Facility Needs • 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

18. System Wide Trends: FMP Budget $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

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

20. University CentersComprehensive CollegesTechnology Colleges Trends by Sector:

21. University Centers: FMP Enrollment Projections 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

22. University Centers: Unique Issues 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

23. University Centers:

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

25. Comprehensive Colleges: Unique Issues 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 centers

26. Comprehensive Colleges:

27. Technology Colleges: FMP Enrollment Projections 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

28. Technology Colleges: Unique Issues 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

29. 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

30. Technology Colleges: 30

31. FMP Future: 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!

33. Questions