Facilities Master Plan - Society for College and University Planning

Campus Planning
•
RFQ/RFP’s
Preparing Your
Campus Planning RFQ/RFP
Session 1: Overview
Nancy Nusbaum, Session Moderator
Assistant VP Fin. & Support Services Planning Southwest Texas State University
Michael S. Rudden, AIA – Campus Planner
The Saratoga Associates (NYC-Boston-Saratoga Springs)
Mark Valenti, - Technology Consultant
The Sextant Group Inc. (Pittsburgh)
Scott B. Page, RA – Academic Space Planner
Scott Blackwell Page Architects (NYC)
SCUP 38 • July 2003
SCUP 38 MIAMI JULY 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Session Agenda
• Campus Master Planning
• Reasons for Planning
• Evolution of Campus Planning / RFQ-P
• Integrated Campus Planning Model
• RFQ/RFP Content
• Lessons Learned
• Discussion
SCUP 38 • July 2003
SCUP 38 MIAMI JULY 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
10 Most Common Reasons for Planning
1. Recent Strategic Plan ? Accreditation ?
2. Administration Change ?
3. Justify / Identify Next Major Project ?
4. Update Annual Capital Improvement Plan ?
5. Meet State Higher Ed. Agency Requirements ?
6. Address Infrastructure Deferred Maintenance ?
7. Improve Space Documentation, Utilization &
Distribution ?
8. Evaluate Potential Land Acquisition/Disposition ?
9. Regional Local Jurisdictional / Regulatory Requirement
10. Campus Traffic and Parking ?
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Comprehensive Campus Facilities Plan
“Projections of physical facilities,
both existing and future, for a given campus to
accommodate over a specific time frame the
existing and future functional-aesthetic needs as
defined by decision makers
given potentially identified resources.”
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Planning Variables
• Physical Facilities
• Specific Time Frame
• Functional & Aesthetic Needs
• Decision Makers
• Resources
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Campus Master Planning: 1 st Generation
“Grand Vision”
• 1970’s – 1980’s
• ‘grand vision’..’big
architecture’
• Stand Alone Effort
• 10-Year Window
• Projects w/ Costs
• Implementation Schedule
• Project Funding Tool
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
1 st Generation RFQ/P’s
• Team
• Process
• Deliverable
• Limitations
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Campus Planning: 2 nd
Generation
Composite Vision,
Inclusive Process,
Planning ‘Tool’
• 1990’s – Present
• 3 Ring w/ CD-Rom
• Documentation &
Assessment
• Project Implementation
Plan
• In-house tool to manage
change.
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
2 nd Generation RFQ/P’s
• Team
• Process
• Deliverables
• Limitations
Realistic Short Term Planning……
…………Long Term Vision
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Limitations of Today’s RFQ/P’s
• Hand Me Downs
• Quantity & Quality
• Breath & Depth
• Analysis vs. Synthesis
• Required Expertise
• Solicitation Outreach
• Establishing $
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Complexity of Campus Planning Today
•Institution Functions/Roles.
•Diversity
•Accountability
•Dependency
•Affordability
•Complexity
•Rate of Change
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
• Today: Independently in
Sequence every 5+years
• Strategic Plan/
Accreditation
• Academic Plan
• Technology Plan
• Financial Plan
• Capital Improvement Plan
• Tomorrow ?
• Integrated
• Annually
Integrated Planning ?
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Campus Planning Model
5.
1.
2.
1. Strategic Plan
2. Academic Plan
3. Technology Plan
4. Financial Plan
4.
3.
5. Capital Improvement Plan
Institutional Plans
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Strategic Plan
• Environmental Scan
• Updated Mission Statement
• Goals & Objectives
• Responsibility Assignment
• Success Measurements
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Financial Plan
•Annual Operating Budget
•Capital Improvement Budget
•Debt Capacity
•Funding Resources
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Academic Plan
•Enrollment Management
•Faculty Resource
Management
•Instructional Delivery
Systems
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Enrollment Management
• Identify Factors
Impacting
Institution’s Market
and Enrollment
Exceeding expectations
• Establish
Enrollment
Projections
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Faculty Resources
• Identify Hiring Faculty
Strategy
• Focus of Hiring Strategy
• Projected Fulltime Faculty Lines
• Utilization of Adjunct Budget
• Facility Implications of Hiring
Strategy
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Instructional Delivery
• Delivery Modes
• Inventory of Current
Modes of Delivery
• Projected Changes to
Instructional Delivery
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Technology Plan
• Instructional Technology
• Information Technology
• Knowledge Management
• Organization
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Instructional Technology
Classroom
Distance Education
• Delivery modes
• Web based (to the desktop)
• Classroom based (to the classroom)
• Timing
• Synchronous – scheduled class time
• Asynchronous – available anytime
• Communication Methods
• Simplex (broadcast)
• Duplex (bi-directional)
• Hybrid Solutions
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Information Technology
• General Use Computers
• Administrative Computing
• Local and Wide Area
Networks
• Wired and Wireless
• Voice Communications
• PBX and Voice-over-IP
(VoIP)
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Information Resources
• Administrative Software (e.g. Banner)
• Courseware Management (e.g. Blackboard)
• Content Development
• Library Automation System
• Web Site / Portal
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Knowledge Management
• Information Assets
• Meeting the needs of lifelong customers
• Comprehensive management of all college records
• Admissions, Registrar, Bursar, Alumni Relations, Development
• A technology infused curriculum demands that captured or created
courseware be organized and archived for future use
• Components:
• Enterprise software (e.g. Banner and WebCT), data storage systems,
conversion of older, analog documents, policies and procedures to support the
effort
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Facilities Capital Improvement Plan
• Property Inventory
• Environmental Scan
• Facilities Conditions Audit
• Physical Space Inventory
• Implementation Plan
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD
Facilities Needs Assessment
Definition of Total Need by Priority and Institutional Mission
$60,000.0
Facility Conditions Audit
Total Need
$57,019.8
Institutional Mission Distribution
Accessibility
$1,633.0
Facilities Needs $(000)
$50,000.0
$40,000.0
$30,000.0
$20,000.0
$10,000.0
Priority 3
$23,727.7
5 to 10 Years
Priority 2
$12,957.5
3 to 5 Years
Priority 1
$20,334.6
1 to 3 Years
Safety &
Statutory
$12,633.8
22.2%
Asset
Preservation
$25,512.5
44.7%
Cost Containment
$487.4 1.0%
2.9%
Academic
Program
$2,305.2
4.0%
Student Life
$12,342.0
21.6%
3.7%
$0.0
Public Interface
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Understanding the Numbers
Space Standards & Formulae
Finger Lakes Community College
Facilities Master Plan
Space Calculations for Fall 1996/2001 - Main Campus (Modified)
1996
Existing
2,614 FTEs
2,311 FTEs
1996
Required
2,614 FTEs
2,311 FTEs
Space Needs
Current
Deficit
2001
Required
3,030 FTEs
2,679 FTEs
Projected
Deficit
Total FTEs
FTEs Generated at Main Campus
Instructional Space 88,344 sf 74,730 sf 13,614 sf 89,459 sf -1,115 sf
Public Service 7,940 sf 7,940 sf 0 sf 7,940 sf 0 sf
Instructional Resources 2,882 sf 5,940 sf -3,058 sf 8,296 sf -5,414 sf
Electronic Data Processing 2,740 sf 4,560 sf -1,820 sf 5,310 sf -2,570 sf
Library 29,632 sf 25,040 sf 4,592 sf 26,907 sf 2,725 sf
Health & Physical Education 28,033 sf 37,000 sf -8,967 sf 47,000 sf -18,967 sf
Student Activity Space 26,072 sf 27,447 sf -1,375 sf 31,815 sf -5,743 sf
Health Services 501 sf 1,500 sf -999 sf 1,500 sf -999 sf
Assembly & Exhibition 964 sf 11,120 sf -10,156 sf 11,120 sf -10,156 sf
Administration 18,757 sf 15,684 sf 3,073 sf 18,180 sf 577 sf
Central Services 14,917 sf 16,524 sf -1,607 sf 16,524 sf -1,607 sf
Building Services 1,086 sf 6,825 sf -5,739 sf 7,922 sf -6,836 sf
Total Net Area 221,868 sf 234,310 sf -12,442 sf 271,973 sf -50,105 sf
Classroom,
Classroom,
Lecture
Lecture
& Support
Support
Class
Class
Lab
Lab
& Support
Support
Ind.
Ind.
Study
Study
Lab
Lab
& Support
Support
Faculty
Faculty
Offices
Offices
& Support
Support
Research
Research
& Support
Support
Library
Library
Physical
Physical
Education
Education
Assembly
Assembly
& Exhibition
Exhibition
Student
Student
& Faculty
Faculty
Services
Services
St
St
udent
udent
Health
Health
Services
Services
Instructional
Instructional
Resources
Resources
General
General
Administration
Administration
Electronic
Electronic
Data
Data
Processing
Processing
Campus
Campus
Services
Services
160,000
160,000
140,000
140,000
120,000
120,000
100,000
100,000
80,000
80,000
EXISTING SPACE SPACE vs. vs. CALUCLATED SPACE SPACE 2000-2010
0
0
sf
sf
50,000
50,000
sf
sf
100,000
100,000
sf
sf
150,000
150,000
sf
sf
200,000
200,000
sf
sf
250,000
250,000
sf
sf
Space Space Existing Existing Fall Fall 2000 2000 Space Space Need Need Fall Fall 2000 2000 Space Space Need Need Fall Fall 2010 2010
COMPARISON BY BY SCHOOL
If Unit T is Replaced by Construction
-2,520 sf
60,000
60,000
Revised Total 219,348 sf 234,310 sf -14,962 sf 271,973 sf -52,625 sf
Percentage Deficit -19%
Modification
The table above assumes a change in the teaching environments of several departments by the out year of this study.
The impact is that several traditionally lecture based courses will move impact to a computer lab. The largest
contributors will be English and Mathematics.
Negative numbers represent additional space needed.
40,000
40,000
20,000
20,000
0
0 CLASSROOM ALLIED HEALTH & ARTS &
SCIENCE, ENG. & SOCIAL &
CLASSROOM ALLIED HEALTH & ARTS &
BUSINESS EDUCATION SCIENCE, ENG. & SOCIAL &
SPACE
NURSING HUMANITIES
BUSINESS EDUCATION
TECH BEHAVORIAL SCI
SPACE
NURSING HUMANITIES
TECH BEHAVORIAL SCI
Existing 2000 81,810 30,205 56,042 8,444 26,568 148,477 31,359
Existing 2000 81,810 30,205 56,042 8,444 26,568 148,477 31,359
Need 2000 107,978 70,024 75,890 19,798 36,052 120,986 49,484
Need 2000 107,978 70,024 75,890 19,798 36,052 120,986 49,484
Need 2010 114,282 77,691 80,091 20,963 42,626 127,468 54,624
Need 2010 114,282 77,691 80,091 20,963 42,626 127,468 54,624
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
PSI & Space Inventory
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Conceptual Site Master Plan
• Short/Mid/Long Term
• Identifies Potential
• Preserves & Protects
• Keeps Options Open
• Order and Organization
• Musical Chairs
• Image & Impressions
• Vocabulary & Guidelines
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Implementation Plan Summary
PROJECT GROUPS 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009+
Group A - ATEC & Bldg. 9 Ph 1 Renovation $1.80 $5.92 $21.69 $23.27 $5.43 $5.43 $23.78
Group B - New North Bldg. & Renovation Bldg. 4,5,6 & 8 $2.70 $10.62 $14.09 $7.36 $4.16
Group C - New South Bldg. & Renovation 7, 9 (Ph2)& 10 $12.45
Group D - All Other Renovation $0.13 $0.85 $2.06 $7.49 $8.69 $30.30
Group E - Phyiscal Facilities / Receiving / Storage $3.07
Group F - Campus Site Improvements $0.33 $0.73 $3.05 $1.21 $0.33 $0.33 $2.37
Group G - Building 23 - Applied Technology Center (ATC) $0.14
PROJECT COSTS @ 2002 $ $2.13 $9.48 $36.21 $40.63 $20.61 $18.61 $72.11
INFLATED PROJECT COSTS @ 3.5 % $2.54 $14.03 $56.79 $68.60 $48.70 $45.75 $183.14
$236.41
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Campus Planning Model
1. Strategic Plan
5.
1.
Planning
Scope
4.
3.
2.
2. Academic Plan
3. Technology Plan
4. Capital Improvement
Plan
5. Financial Plan
Comprehensive Plan
Scope of Services
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Planning Methodology
Plans
Analysis……………………………Synthesis
“AS IS” “TO BE” “HOW TO” “WHAT”
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Planning Methodology
• Strategic Plan
Analysis……………………………Synthesis
“AS IS” “TO BE” “HOW TO” “WHAT”
• Academic Plan
• Technology Plan
• Facilities Plan
• Financial Plan
Extent of existing plans
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Planning Methodology
• Strategic Plan
Analysis……………………………Synthesis
“AS IS” “TO BE” “HOW TO” “WHAT”
• Academic Plan
• Technology Plan
• Capital Plan
• Financial Plan
Scope of Planning Needed
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Integrated Planning Methodology
• Strategic Plan
Analysis……………………………Synthesis
“AS IS” “TO BE” “HOW TO” “WHAT”
• Academic Plan
• Technology Plan
• Capital Plan
• Financial Plan
Defines Campus Planning Scope of Work
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Campus Planning: 3rd Generation
• Links Institutional Plans
• Provides Multiple Viewpoints
• Convergence of Best Thinking
• Decisions in Context
• Leverage Solutions
Campus Planning:
“Integrated Planning”
• Requires Pre-proposal Planning
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
3 rd Generation RFQ/P’s
• Pre-Proposal Planning
• Team:
• Campus Planners w/
• Specialist Consultants
• Planning Process:
• On-going effort
• 40% assessment / 60%
synthesis
• Web based
• Deliverable:
• Electronic based
Integrated Planning
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Typical RFQ/RFP Content
1. Introduction / Solicitation Intent
2. Institutional Background & Planning History
3. Anticipated Scope of Work / Deliverables
4. Anticipated Planning Process / Schedule
5. Form of Agreement / Target Fee Range
6. Available Plans/Studies/Data/Documents
7. Selection Process & Evaluation Criteria
8. Specific Submittal Content & Format
9. Instructions to Consultants & Contact Information
10. Attachments or Website
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Typical Proposal Submission Contents
1. Cover Letter
2. Firm History, Size, Expertise & Location
3. Approach to Campus Planning
4. Relevant Campus Experience & Projects with
References
5. Team Organization Chart / Key Resumes
6. Proposed Scope of Services / Schedule
7. Proposed Fee Basis
8. Required Business Information (forms)
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
10 RFQ/RFP Lessons Learned
1. Align ‘planning scope’ to ‘why’
2. Ratio of assessment/synthesis
3. ‘Planning’ is different from ‘designing’
4. Updating more effective/less expensive
5. Invest in data that you can update
6. Communicate your planning budget
7. What you can afford not to do
8. Interview variable should be the interviewee
9. Not to be perfectly wrong
10. Pre-proposal planning
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Session 2 Agenda ?
1. Identify and link interested parties
2. Linking w/ SCUP resources
3. Establish standard vocabulary/formats
4. Create self-assessment tools
5. Identifying planning scope vs breath
6. Soliciting RFQ/RFP process
7. Scope of Services ‘check list’
8. Negotiating terms and conditions
9. Fee basis
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Discussion
People, not just
the process,
make for
successful
master planning
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
Campus planners seek institutions that:
• understands their own
strengths/weaknesses
• can clearly communicate
their issues and aspirations
• establish planning budget
and ask for value added
• and engage in a selection
process that emphasizes
results, substance and
fairness.
SCUP 38 • July 2003

Campus Planning RFQ/RFP’s
10 Most Frustrating RFP Elements !
1. No sense of fee range
2. Level of related planning studies/reports?
3. Firm’s capacity to take on the work ?
4. Hourly rate structure when fee is lump sum
5. Excessive proposal copies / ‘samples’
6. Unreasonable notification for interview schedule
7. Prolonged planning process (beyond 14 months)
8. Unwieldy size of advisory committee (20+)
9. Selection committees have not read proposals
10. Expecting ‘free’ planning services at interview
SCUP 38 • July 2003