University of Alaska Facilities Council

DRAFT – May 4, 2011

Agenda: May 11, 2011 1:15-3:30pm VIDEO LOCATIONS:

Fairbanks- BUTRO 212B

Anchorage- ADMIN 204

Juneau- Egan 113

I. Approval of Agenda II. AVPF/CFO Information Items

a. Report on Facilities Issues from Business Council, SAC b. Report on BOR Strategic Plan process and status (see attachment) c. AHFC grant funding: will borrowing for construction affect UA’s debt capacity?

III. Facility Director Comments/Reports a. UAA: Chris T b. UAF: Scott B c. UAS: Keith G

IV. Ongoing Issues for Discussion/Action a. AHFC application for audit funding – status update Jenny C, MAUs b. Sightlines implementation – status update Linda Z c. AssetWorks Implementation Linda Z

i. Status/action ii. Identification of any issues needing attention

d. FY12 Capital Budget: Alesia, Kit i. Def Maint, R&R funding

ii. Spending on DM funding e. FY13 budget prep – guidelines, schedule f. Strategy for Sustainment funding for facilities

i. University Building Fund ii. DM Program – June distribution

g. UA Planning Process (see attachment) h. Expected BOR Agenda for Future FLMC and BOR meetings: Facilities Directors

i. September 2011 BOR i. BOR Policy j. Adequacy of resources for implementation and planning project work

V. New Issues for Discussion a. Metrics Matter (see attachments) – benchmarking for facilities, BOR strategic plan

VI. Future Agenda Items VII. Closing Remarks VIII. Next Meeting: June 8, 2011 1:15-3:30 IX. Adjourn

Engage UA Stakeholders

Phase I Winter-Spring 2011

Phase II Summer 2011

Phase III Fall 2011

Phase IV Winter-Spring 2012

consult with appropriate systemwide and MAU forums, committees, boards

consult with appropriate external individuals/groups

Transition Road

1

Identify Boundaries and Differences Between

Current and New Plans

identify differences between 2009 BOR Strategic Plan and current goals

and objectives

2

Transition Road

Transition Road

identify phases of strategic planning and role of consultant

Develop Goals and Objectives and Framework

for Measuring Progress

define secondary themes aligned with goals and objectives

define metrics to measure performance, goals and objectives

3

illustrate desired performance standards for each area

distinguish system values from goals and outcomes

Validate Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures

consult with appropriate internal forums, committees, and boards

consult with appropriate external individuals/groups

4

Determine resources needed to implement the plan and identify

responsible parties for implementation

accommodate MAU strategic plans and mission statements

STA

RT

FINISH

Develop a Compre-hensive Draft Plan

review plan with internal and external constituencies

identify support for learning new standards and measures

5

review with Board of Regents

Transition Road

Align Data Systems with Planning Efforts

ensure data systems support longitudinal, comprehensive

tracking of plan

address issues of moving from current accountability

systems to new standards/measures

6

Monitor Indicators of Progress

allow for monitoring and adjustment during transition

study and emulate implementations by higher

performing units, MAUs, etc.

7

report measures of progress

April 2011 UA Academic Affairs

Source Documents:UA Strategic and Academic Plans

MAU Strategic and Academic PlansMAU Department Program Proposal

MAU Campus Master PlanMAU Housing/Campus Life Strategic Plan

Is this a mission expansion?

Academic, Budget and Project Planning Process

Is this Academic in nature?

1a. MAU produces a Academic Mission Area

Analysis (MAA), a Statement of Need (SON) and a

Program Proposal (PP)

2. MAU produces a Program Action Request (PAR)Formerly a HEX Form

3. MAU Submits to SAC for review and

approval

4. MAU develops a Preliminary Administrative Approval Request (PAA)

5. MAU submits to the President for review and

approval

1b. MAU produces an Administrative Mission

Area Analysis (MAA) and a Statement of Need (SON)

IR Data input

Statement of Requirements Components

Faculty/Staff FF&E Infrastructure

Backfill, Other Second Order

Impacts

Building Operations and

Maintenance

New Space, Remodeling

6. MAU produces a Statement of Requirements

(SOR)

YES YES

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

Process Ends

11. Governor and Legislature Action

12. UA BOR accepts Appropriated

Budgets

13. Board of Regents Project Approval

Processes

10. President, FLMC and BOR approval of

operating and capital budgets, and

LRP

8. MAU Develops Business and Financing Plan

7. Is this an Academic Program?

7a. MAU submits

SON and SOR to BOR Academic and Student Affairs

Committee for approval

YES

YESNO

NO

9. Operating and Capital Budgets, and Long Range Capital

Plan (LRP) Development

Construction – New or Expansion, Large R&R

Infrastructure – New or Expansion

Deferred Maintenance and Small R&R projects

Time FramesSteps 1-3 may require 3-12 months Steps 4-7 may require 1-3 monthsSteps 8-13 generally require 7-8 monthsStep 14 will vary depending on the size of the project (a few weeks to several years.)

14. Project AgreementFormal Project Approval

Schematic Design ApprovalChange Requests

Project Bid/Award ReportsFinal Project Report

Rev. 4-22-11

Project Type

14a. Pre-Design StatementBoard Approval of Project

Cohort via the June Distribution List

Change RequestsProject Bid/Award Reports

Final Report on project cohort

Program Modeling

MS1

MS0

MS0

MS2

MS3

MS4

MS5

MS6

MS#

ProcessMile

Stones

Is this a DM or SmallR&R Project?

YES

NO

Purpose of the Program Modeling, Academic, Budget and Project Planning Process is to demonstrate the integration of academic program, institution budgeting, and facilities project planning and development processes. This process flow chart is meant to inform the various institution participants and stakeholders concerning the integration of these processes. Definitions

MS #0 Mission Area Analysis (MAA): a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a proposed mission area, creation, expansion or substantive change, aligned with appropriate plans and policies. (This may be analogous to the MAU Program Proposal approved by local Faculty Senate, summarized and submitted to SAC by the MAU.) Program Proposal (PP): a part of current academic process, it is the academic analysis for a program of study, including course descriptions, which accompanies the Program Action Request (formerly called HEX form) Program Action Request (formerly HEX form): (need this definition)

MS#1 Statement of Need (SON): a concise summary of the compelling facts derived from the MAA data and PP, and submitted with the Program Action Request (aka HEX form) to SAC for review and approval.

MS#2 Preliminary Administrative Approval request (PAA): the first step in the Board Policy project approval requirement. In part it grants authorization to spend MAU funds to fully investigate thye requirements for moving forward and is required to include a project in the UA capital plan.

MS#3 Statement of Requirements (SOR): the detailed solution set (options) that can satisfy the SON. It includes: identification of program personnel requirements; facility needs; furnishings, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) requirements; operations and maintenance (O&M) costs; and second order effects, such as backfill planning, personnel consolidation, opportunity gained or lost. This is the document that identifies all the potential impacts and potential costs associated with a mission expansion and is submitted to the Board for review and acceptance. It identifies the issues that will need to be addressed in detail in a business plan if approvals to proceed are acquired. Business (and Financing) Plan: this document is the administrative guidance and management tool utilized during the budgeting, project delivery and program operation phases. (Program operation and accountability process is not addressed in this chart.) Long Range Plan (LRP): the document required by Board Policy and Governor’s Office of Management and Budget. It projects university capital planning for ten years. Project Cohort: a priority listing of projects intended to be completed from a funding source, such as a deferred maintenance appropriation. Formal Project Approval and Schematic Design Approval: the second and third steps in the Board Policy project approval requirement.