Privately Funded Capital Improvement Program Process for Inclusion in University's Long Range Building Plans
Step 1. President issues on a biennial basis, a university wide call for privately funded capital project proposals. Proposals would include any project supported in whole or part by contributed income or other non-state means. Deans, Department Chairs (though Deans), Program Center Heads, Auxiliary Organization, and other established university entities, may reply to the President's call;
Step 2. In reply to President's call, each Academic Dean may submit a ranked list of proposed projects (highest to lowest priority) for his/her school using university wide academic criteria adopted (and approved by President) by the Campus Environment Committee and the Academic Vice President.
Step3. Other submission from university affiliated entities to the Office of University Affairs for subsequent review and ranking by the president's Staff.
Step 3a. President sorts projects from Dean's lists and other submission into A and B categories (see below for description of categories) and transmits the resultant ranking to Vice President, Academic Affairs, Executive Vice President, Academic Deans, Council on University Planning and others as appropriate, for review and comment;
Step 3b. President receives and review results from Step 3a. and confirms the A and B categorical rankings;
Step 4. President conveys the A and B categorical ranking for projects to the CSUS Trust Foundation for review and comment. The Trust Foundation Board of Directors employ marketplace criteria to advise the President on the categorical rankings and funding potential for the proposed projects;
Step 5. President, with advice and counsel from the Trust Foundation, President's Staff, Council for University Planning and Academic Deans established a final A and B categorical ranking for the proposed projects;
Step 6. Category A campaigns may commence with implementation schedules, budgets, management structures and personnel assignments as appropriate. Trust Foundation reviews and recommends implementation plans for all category A projects as required. Establishing Priorities Criteria for project inclusion in A and B categories and establishing rankings among projects in category A:
A. Academic criteria include anticipated growth rates in enrollment and other factors related to programmatic substance. These criteria are employed by Deans, President, and others within the university as may be appropriate in deciding which capital projects are to be included in categories A and B and the ranking among projects in category A. A draft copy of academic criteria is attached.
B. Marketplace criteria include factors related to financing the project. These factors are to be used by the Trust Foundation in advising the President on those category A projects that have the most promising prospects of attracting donor support or achieving financial requirements in other ways; Project Categories A. Projects in category A have satisfied the conditions of marketplace and academic criteria; B. Projects in category B have not satisfied the conditions of marketplace and academic criteria and will not be included in multiyear capital campaigns undertaken by the university. projects in this category are, however, eligible to be advanced to the A grouping if substantial funds have been secured or pledged if they satisfy the conditions of market place and academic criteria through the next biennial review cycle. Scheduling and Organizing the Privately Funded Capital Improvement Programs University describes long range (20 years into the future) privately funded capital needs in A and B categories; Stages campaign implementation for category A with two or three projects clustered for each 5 year period. Trust Foundation carries out established role in campaign review and implementation.