Space Utilization and Optimization Initiative

The Importance of Space

Given the scale of the university at the time (we had more than 11 million square feet), the creation of very small efficiencies could compound to significant financial gains, which could then be invested in academic and research priorities and student services. The following were considered:

• The availability of classroom and student study space promotes student success and graduation rates.
• The decreasing opportunities to expand on main campus.
• Quality and availability of space impact external competition for students, faculty and research grants.
• The cost of managing and operating space is typically a university’s largest non-personnel expenditure.

Approaches Not Working

Approaches to space management and governance at the time were not fully meeting the university's academic, administrative and research demands, nor did they fully meet demands for student services such as on campus housing or gathering space for student organizations.

• There was inconsistent deployment of technology in classrooms across campus, which lead to pedagogical difficulties and thereby lower classroom utilization.
• Student organizations did not have enough space for meeting, requiring many to schedule meetings off campus.
• Auxiliary spaces such as dining facilities were under-utilized during non-meal times and could have been slightly modified to serve as student study areas.

In order to address these and other issues, and to continue to address the university’s ever increasing demands for space, campus leadership chartered The Space Utilization and Optimization Committee in the summer of 2014.

The Space Utilization Steering Committee (founded Summer 2014) was made up of academic and administrative leaders from across campus.  The committee worked to implement a set of near term solutions while also reviewing and considering a full set of recommendations from an external review.  Below is a list of all involved parties and their roles at the time.

Executive Sponsors

• Russell Moore (Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs)
• Kelly Fox (Senior Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer)

Project Lead

• Chris Ewing (Interim Assistant Vice Chancellor, Infrastructure and Safety)

Members

• Ann Carlos (Associate Dean for Social Sciences and Dean for Buildings & Space)
• Paul Chinowsky (Professor, Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering)
• David Hamrick (Director of IT Operations)
• Bill Haverly (Director of Planning, Design and Construction)
• Carla Ho-a (Assistant Vice Chancellor Budget & Fiscal Planning)
• David Jacobs (Capital Assets Space Planning)
• Bill Kaempfer (Sr. Vice Provost, Associate Vice Chancellor for Budget and Planning)
• Kambiz Khalili (Sr. Assistant Vice Chancellor and Executive Director of HDS)
• Mary Kraus (Sr. Associate Dean for Natural Sciences)
• Larry Levine (Interim Vice Chancellor for Infrastructure and Safety)
• Patricia Rankin (Associate Vice Chancellor for Research)
• Leslie Reynolds (Senior Associate Dean of Libraries)
• Catherine Shea (Chancellor's Chief of Staff)
• Zack Tupper (College of Arts & Sciences Buildings Manager)
• Louise Vale (Interim Associate Vice Chancellor for Budget & Fiscal Planning)
• Steve Vassallo (Assistant Vice Chancellor, Integrated Planning & Decision Support)
• JoAnn Zelasko (Assistant Dean for Administration)

The university contracted Huron Consulting, a global consulting group, to analyze CU-Boulder’s use of all campus space and to offer recommendations for optimizing its use.

The purpose of this partnership was:

• to help the university deepen its understanding of its space
• to benefit from Huron's specialized expertise in higher education and their knowledge of best practices in space utilization
• to more effectively coordinate the planning and use of that space across colleges, departments and units

Methodology Overview

1. In September of 2014, the university charged Huron to conduct comprehensive analysis of the current state of space on campus. The analysis consisted of:
   
   • campus interviews
   • user surveys
   • focus groups
   • a quantitative review of space data pulled from multiple campus systems and sources
2. Huron then compared their current state analysis against the campus’ needs and Huron’s knowledge and research of instructional trends and use of space at other higher education institutions.
3. Huron submitted the Space Utilization and Optimization Final Report to campus leadership and to the steering committee.
4. The steering committee, with guidance from the Provost and Senior Vice Chancellor, identified some long-term improvements to process and space planning which they hope to address with input and oversight from all of campus.

Huron Report

As intended, Huron’s analysis produced a number of findings that Huron believed would help close the gap between how space was used at the time and how we would need to use it in the future. These findings and recommendations were published for consideration by the committee in the following documents:

• CU Boulder Space Utilization and Optimization Final Report
• ​CU Boulder Auxiliaries and Public Private Partnership Report

The analysis conducted by Huron, as well as the findings and recommendations submitted to the university in Huron’s final report, were not intended to serve as a mandate for specific actions. Rather, it was the university’s intention to listen closely to Huron’s third-party observations and to benefit from Huron’s expertise in the field of higher education, but to make its own decisions about institutional changes based on the committee’s own unique understanding of campus and university goals and through engagement with constituents across campus.

Initiatives Put in Place at the Time

Further refine, clarify and analyze data about how space was used on campus

While accurate for reporting purposes and generally comparing ourselves against peer institutions, the campus space data lacked sufficient granularity as well as day-to-day accuracy to more efficiently manage our space. The Committee believed the campus needed more relevant definitions of the multiple terms used for various types of space on campus (i.e. labs, study space, classroom space, student space, etc.). These terms meant different things to different constituencies and oversimplified the unique ways space was used across the campus. To increase the timeliness of the data it was likely that space classification needed to be updated more frequently via software and the active participation of knowledgeable campus members.

Technology

The steering committee believed that challenges at the time with our space data were due, in part, to the processes and tools in use for tracking space. A subcommittee worked to procure a common space management tool to be deployed for all of campus.

Further investigate the space management and governance as it existed on campus

A subcommittee worked to assess the potential benefit of a more formal structure for the consistent and effective management of campus space.

Increase efforts to enhance student success

The committee was committed to ensuring that Student Success informs the process by which space utilization recommendations are implemented. The committee focused on space initiatives that would support student success such as increasing student study space and utilizing a more robust system of core scheduling.

Identify areas of immediate impact that we could have begun working on immediately

• computer labs
• data centers
• expanding public/private partnerships