SCUP
 

Learning Resources

Your Higher Education Planning Library

Combine search terms, filters, institution names, and tags to find the vital resources to help you and your team tackle today’s challenges and plan for the future. Get started below, or learn how the library works.

FOUND 85 RESOURCES

REFINED BY:

  • Tags: External Collaboration / PartnershipsxCapital Planningx

Clear All
ABSTRACT:  | 
SORT BY:  | 
Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
June 1, 2001

Featured Image

The Value of Comprehensive Capital Planning

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.

From Volume 29 Number 4 | Summer 2001

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.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

ebook

Published
January 1, 1989

Featured Image

Financial Planning Guidelines for Facility Renewal and Adaption

This publication provides executive managers and trustees with guidelines for long-term financial planning for plant renewal and adaption.
Abstract: Skillful management of an institution's physical assets is crucial to the institution's financial well-being. This publication provides executive managers and trustees with guidelines for long-term financial planning for plant renewal and adaption. It provides these strategic decision makers with a better understanding of the financial planning requirements necessary to protect the value of their institution's plant assets in relation to evolving institutional missions by giving them a clearer way to think about those assets. Readers are furnished with guidelines, examples of campus plans that incorporate them, and analytic tools.

A joint project of Society for College and University Planning (SCUP), The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO), The Association of Physical Plant Administrators of Universities and Colleges (APPA), and Coopers and Lybrand.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Non-Member Price:
$45

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 1973

Featured Image

Consortia

The Decision-Makers

Consortia, their impact on cooperating institutions, and critical factors in inter-institutional planning were the subject of a recent study for the United States Office of Education. This article, by staff members of one of the the studied consortia, is devoted to a discussion of the process of consortium decision-making.

From Volume 2 Number 2 | April 1973

Abstract: Consortia, their impact on cooperating institutions, and critical factors in inter-institutional planning were the subject of a recent study for the United States Office of Education, directed by Harold L. Hodgkinson of the Center for Research and Development in Higher Education at the University of California at Berkeley. The critical issues, according to the study findings, are problems of reciprocity and autonomy, coordination of programs among diverse institutions, and strategies for campus involvement and leadership. The following article, by three staff members of the New Hampshire College and University Council—one of the consortia in the Hodgkinson study—is devoted to a discussion of the process of consortium decision-making, touching on the three key issues. The authors are: Lynn G. Johnson, the Council's associate director in charge of academic programs; Dr. William W. Barnard, consultant and coordinator of a two-year Cooperative Curriculum Project, and Douglas W. Lyon, coordinator of January Term Programs and communications coordinator.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 1973

Featured Image

Baltimore

The College That Tried

This article is a profile of one institution—the new Inner Harbor campus of the Community College of Baltimore—that tried to share its facilities with commercial interests—and failed.

From Volume 2 Number 2 | April 1973

Abstract: There are good reasons—educational, economic, sociological—for educational institutions to coexist on the same site or even in the same building with governmental, residential, or commercial functions. At the same time there are roadblocks to such joint-occupancy arrangements, particularly for public institutions, in the laws governing the financing of public buildings and in bureaucratic inertia. This article is a profile of one institution—the new Inner Harbor campus of the Community College of Baltimore—that tried to share its facilities with commercial interests—and failed.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access