FY2018-2022 Capital Projects Review and Comments
Scoring Team Project Analysis - Supplemental Scoring Form
SUPPLEMENTAL SCORING FORM
For projects adding new square footage only (over 5,000 s.f. of net new square footage)
Scoring Team Name:
Institution and Campus:
Project Title:
Project Net New Sq. Ft.:
Core commitments in the Strategic Framework for capital planning in FY2016-2021 are:
 Ensure access to an extraordinary education for all Minnesotans
 Be the partner of choice to meet Minnesota’s workforce and community needs
 Deliver to students, employers, communities and taxpayers the highest value/most affordable higher education option
4.0
FOR PROJECTS ADDING NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE ONLY
Consider the following criteria when new space is proposed (circle your choice):
Strategic Framework Elements
Low
Ave
Guidance on documentation needed for
Low – Ave – High score
High
5
Low – no evidence of enrollment increases; or,
evidence of enrollment decrease in targeted
service area; low space utilization;
Ave – Evidence of enrollment increases in the
program area that would be enhanced by new
space; could not be addressed with leased
space; workforce / verifiable evidence of
graduate success
High – enrollment demands coupled with
specialized workforce skills, equipment or needs
that cannot be fulfilled in existing space; outside
partner provides equipment or other matching
funds; does not significantly increase campus
square footage
5
Low – no discussion of alternative space
solutions; no evidence of long-term solution to
space problems
Ave – discussion of alternatives to solving space
by renovation of on campus space; evidence
that campus leased space for this purpose and
have enrollment to back up need for space on
campus
High – campus has proof of concept that
program is successful in off-campus or other
location; evaluated space sharing with other
MnSCU institution or operated with other
MnSCU institution previously; long term
enrollment trends and enrollment needs support
space on campus
Verifiable evidence of enrollment demands and
workforce needs that support the need for new
space
1
4.1
2
3
4
Consideration of space needs that can be
satisfied through short- or long-term methods,
such as leasing off-campus space, or sharing
space with other colleges and universities within
the system
1
4.2
Strategic Framework Elements
4.3
Evidence of partner contributions that support a
portion of the construction and operating costs
of the project
2
3
Low
1
4
Ave
2
3
1
Guidance on Documentation needed for
Low – Ave – High score
High
4
5
Low – no matching funds indicated
FY2018-2022 Capital Projects Review and Comments
Scoring Team Project Analysis - Supplemental Scoring Form
Specialized program or student needs that
require construction of new square footage
4.4
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Impact on the viability of a college or
university’s long-term operating budget
4.5
Evidence that technology and flexible space
use have been fully maximized before
proposing the need for new space
4.6
Calculation of the cost to students attributable
to estimated debt service and expected
increase in operating expenses
4.7
Ave. – grant opportunities or other non-state
funds available, but contingent on receipt of
state funds
High – non-state funds provided; endowment or
other financial support (i.e. equipment) offered to
cover at least 50% or more of initial capital cost
Low – program can be accommodated on
campus or in renovated space; no unique
characteristics require new space
Ave. – building and infrastructure obsolescence
make new build more cost effective than
renovation; specialized energy
High – similar to Ave. but includes special
program conditions (i.e. filtering, noise,
hazardous waste, etc) that would benefit from
new or stand alone square footage
Low – the new square footage results in
substantial depreciation expense and operating
expenses (utility costs, maintenance, cleaning)
that would not be offset by gains in enrollment;
projected to put campus Composite Financial
Index (CFI) below 2.0 for at least three years
after receipt of funds; debt service with new
project may require financial restructuring
Ave. – campus will maintain CFI; can manage
debt service; evidence that CFI will remain
stable or grow even if enrollment decline.
High – campus absorbs and expects to grow
CFI with the addition of the project
Low – no evidence of hybrid or online courses
incorporated in program prior to requesting new
square footage
Ave. – high space utilization in program rooms;
no viable space on campus for programs;
campus successfully held online and hybrid
courses to maximize program space
High – similar to Ave., but campus also utilized
some non-traditional meeting times (weekends)
and teaching methodologies to maximize space
and seat utilization; growth of program requires
new square footage
Low – project debt service would add more than
$100,000 / year in institutional debt service; cost
to students on an DS/FYE $20/credit or more
Ave. – Project debt service would be less than
$50,000 or less a year and no more than
$10/credit
High – project debt service of $25,000 or less a
year and DS/FYE of $10/credit or less
TOTAL POINTS:
(Max: 35 points)
2