Learning Resources

Abstract: Learn about the University of Louisville’s (UofL) journey toward carbon neutrality, navigating challenges such as aging infrastructure, substantial deferred maintenance, dependence on city utilities, and financial constraints. UofL’s Planning, Design, and Construction Office strategically used campus planning efforts to collect data, analyze the built environment, and foster robust stakeholder engagement with the campus community and city agencies. This approach raises carbon neutrality awareness, aligns goals, and establishes a financially viable pathway to success—all to position UofL to achieve a 60 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 and attain full carbon neutrality by 2050.

Abstract: Replace, restore, or renovate? In this article, architects, engineers, and campus administrators offer insights on updating mid-century buildings. Averaging a half-century old, these once-innovative structures are showing signs of age. The author gives guidance on transforming them into buildings that make positive contributions to the 21st-century campus. Topics covered include how to assess a building’s potential for renovation, options for energy-efficient HVAC systems, choosing materials that enhance the building’s performance and reduce operating costs, updating 50-year-old floor plans to support today’s pedagogy, and funding models and sources for projects.

Abstract: Capital projects are designed and built in a number of ways. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, and each prescribes different roles for the owner, architect, and builder. The question is, which way or method best fits your institution’s criteria and project? This article presents a brief outline of the most popular methods by which projects are designed and built.

Abstract: In this second of a two-part series, the author details the progression of steps needed to complete a typical capital improvement project. There are a lot of moving parts, and the article carefully explains how each must mesh to achieve a satisfactory conclusion. Educators and administrators alike will benefit from this overview of procedures that many may not be familiar with. With this guidance, even the most complex project can be accomplished effectively and efficiently.

Abstract: Do you have facility needs, like the need for more/improved space for instruction or infrastructure upgrades? Is it time to address deferred maintenance issues? Do you have reservations about venturing into unfamiliar territory? You’ll have to wrestle with some vexing matters—plan alternatives, big budgets, illusive funding sources, and an uninformed public.
Your concerns are valid. With a rich background as architectural firm principal and later as a community college project manager, the author has been through the drill. This article’s thoughtful advice details a project’s first phases—from initial concepts to developed projects with funding. It will head you toward success by helping to avoid the pitfalls.

Abstract: Establishing the need for both academic program and facilities expansion is key to the success of any long-range planning process. Analyzing return on investment (ROI) is a beneficial yet underutilized metric to use in validating those needs. In a time when public funding is decreasing, it is advantageous to develop capital improvement plans that demonstrate how to achieve maximum financial benefits from the investment in major construction and renovation projects. This article demonstrates how a comprehensive master facilities planning process at Central Piedmont Community College in Charlotte, NC, will help persuade county officials to support a $687 million capital campaign resulting in a positive ROI to students, the institution, and the community.

Abstract: Strategic partnerships are a smart fiscal and educational move for higher education institutions. Many of the nation’s community colleges have long explored symbiotic arrangements that benefit student, community, and school. This article examines three schools’ interactions with their host communities and explores how partnerships help deliver on their role as a true community amenity—from providing their students with state-of-the-art learning environments and working with industry leaders to enhance curricula to reaching a geographically disadvantaged demographic of potential students. Partnership opportunities are broad and plentiful and are often only limited by an institution’s imagination.

Abstract: The increased attention to costs in recent years at colleges and universities draws attention to the matter of whether all costs are reflected and accounted for in the institution’s internal and external financial reports. One category—capital costs—is thought by some to be overlooked at times. The possible neglect of capital costs in institutional planning and in financial reporting has its basis in a theoretical debate on how nonprofit institutions view capital. In order to justify capital as an essential, reportable cost to a nonprofit, it is necessary to see how capital is viewed in the for-profit firm. Even if capital is an essential cost to higher education, accounting and measurement difficulties may arise. This study explores these issues and examines the literature relevant to this topic.

Abstract: The capital renewal and replacement of the nation’s public higher education facilities has been a growing problem for several decades. While the need for new and improved facilities has increased over the years, many campuses simply have too many aging infrastructures that are too costly to replace. This, at a time when we have less than favorable economic conditions, only adds to the situation. As the age, size, and complexity of buildings continue to grow, so too does the amount of maintenance funding required to keep buildings in good working order. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the 50 states’ efforts of funding public higher education capital needs. This study investigated areas relating to capital needs financing, planning, decision-making processes used in each state, available funding, and future directions in the various states. Of the 50 states, 41 states responded, representing 82 percent of the 50 states.

Abstract: An innovative approach to the capital planning process will determine the future physical character of an institution and the capability of facilities to support its programs.