1 / 34

Research Space: Assessing Investment Return

Tom Higerd, Ph.D. Medical University of South Carolina Catherine Watt Clemson University. Research Space: Assessing Investment Return.

nicholas-carroll
Download Presentation

Research Space: Assessing Investment Return

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tom Higerd, Ph.D. Medical University of South Carolina Catherine Watt Clemson University Research Space: Assessing Investment Return Premise: A properly constructed and maintained space database can provide information useful for assessing return on investment and for making informed management decisions. AIR

  2. Space Information Needs Overview of a proposed solution to needs Inventories vs. databases Response to Information Requests Bottom line and examples of space reports How the information is being used MUSC’s “Space Management System” Functional versus physical management of space The Clemson Experience Basic Principles and Their Barriers Technical and process issues Cultural issues Introduction of the SPACE Consortium Outline of Discussion AIR

  3. Research Space Utilization / EfficiencyMetric Overview Space Database Awards Database Personnel Database Enrollment Database AIR

  4. Relational Database (open source My SQL) Middleware (PHP) internet Web Browser Components of a Web-based Space Management System Space Database Fields: Bldg. Name Room Number Area (NASF) College / Unit Department Room Use CIP Code for Dept. Faculty Assigned Faculty Rank Faculty ID FileMaker; Excel; Access; SAS AIR

  5. Space Information Needs Inventories for state and federal needs • Renewed Interest – AAMC annual survey or SCUP • Some states require an annual facilities report • Databases suited for informed management decisions Inventory Database • Focused on mission / program needs • Focused on physical plant attributes • Categories are too general for academic planning • Categories sufficiently specific for program decisions • Difficult to merge with other information • Linkers encourage integrated information • Periodic, labor-intensive updates, and hence, limited timeliness • Interactive and decentralized updates increase reliability and accuracy AIR

  6. Why Research Space and Why Now? Space has been identified as the single rate-limiting factor in expanding research & clinical enterprises. Space has been poorly managed in its assignment. Financial concerns over changing revenue streams and deferred maintenance lead to increased importance. Specialized facilities cost ~ $250.00 ft2 to build; and ~ $18.00 ft2 to maintain. Space Information Needs AIR

  7. Define sovereignty of academic space Defines who has authority over what space -- Central Admin. v College v Department v Division v Center Be a reliable representation of facilities assigned to academic programs Fields and terms must relate to mission-specific functions Have reliable links to other related databases Fields and terms must relate to functional use Maintain a focus on converting data to information • Response to Information Requests • The Bottom Line of a Space Database • An Information System Must: AIR

  8. Response to New Information Needs • Examples of management Reports Ex: Space of an individual faculty member AIR

  9. Response to New Information Needs • Examples of management Reports (Cont.) Ex: Active awards of an individual faculty member AIR

  10. Response to New Information Needs • Examples of management reports (Cont.) Ex: Space of individual departments AIR

  11. Response to New Information Needs • Examples of management Reports (Cont.) Ex: Active awards (lab requiring) of departments Laboratory Requiring Awards ($/NSF) of department research-dedicated space AIR

  12. Genesis of MUSC’s “Space Management System” • Functional versus physical management of space • Initiated in 1989 as method for MUSC to define and establish sovereignty of College of Medicine space • Downloaded PP inventory and cleansed • Refined database to denote functional use of space and authority • Designed and implemented interactive web interface • Integrated research funding data with space data • In process of obtaining discipline-specific data for comparisons with other institutions via the SPACEConsortium AIR

  13. Originally used as a hammer to “free-up” labs Became a tool to assess department’s request for additional lab space Information source for: establishing certain university standards; supporting requests to Boards for capital research expenditures; and supporting requests for renovation in specific grants. Use of MUSC’s “Space Management System” • TheClemsonExperience AIR

  14. June ’02:Introduced the system to Deans, finance officers, college reps, systems leaders July ’02:Ensured accurate space assessment for 19 research buildings for pilot test Sept. ’02:Presented system to President & Provost Sept. ’02:Worked to create new reports based on award proportions Oct. – Dec. ’02:Shared SAMS with other system leaders; PSA, OSHA, Facilities March ’03:Presented first space reports to Chairs April ’03:Presented first reports integrating awards with space information Clemson University:One Year to a Changed Culture AIR

  15. Access rights are broad, yet controlled. At MUSC, these are department business managers (administrators) -- they have first-hand and accurate knowledge. Authorized individuals can make change campus wide. Only selected fields can be changed. Information is verified by annual walk-throughs. There are two databases -- web database and authentic database. Reconciled once a month or as needed Technical Issues The Edit Process - which data fields can be modified by the viewer AIR

  16. Technical Issues - data fields can be modified by the viewer AIR

  17. The Basic Search Engine: AIR

  18. Searchable by fields: AIR

  19. Flexibility in Viewing: • HTML, Tab-delimited, or Excel downloads AIR

  20. Select Only Fields of Interest: AIR

  21. Technical Issues - data fields can be modified by the viewer AIR

  22. Technical Issues - which data fields can be modified by the viewer (Cont.) AIR

  23. Process Issues Web Interface • Data is viewed and edited via the Web Interface • At the end of each month, the Web Space Database is compared with the Master Space Database via the Review Database. • The Review Database updates the “Review Date” Field and synchronizes the two databases. Web Space Database Master Space Database Review Database AIR

  24. Leadership is required to override turf issues and to apply principles uniformly across departments. Encourage the concept of one authoritativedatabase. Information needs require integration of institutional information with space data. Encourage campus-wide acceptance and use through collaboration, therefore minimizing data integrity challenges. Depending on web facility, users may require assistance. Cultural Issues AIR

  25. Cultural Issues (Cont.) Acceptance of data merging Linking Space Data to Awards Awards Database Space Database Name $$$ Sq. Feet 144 85 122 50 130 130 John Jane Jim Jerry Jenny Jes 350 255 214 210 2,095 177 AIR

  26. Awards Database Merge with Space database on Faculty ID Awards Database Fields: Faculty ID Sponsor Title Start Date End Date Total Award Direct dollars (or %) Indirect dollars (or %) Proportion on Award Wet lab required Determine specifics of reports Share within SPACEConsortium Assume it already exists in accurate form AIR

  27. Cultural Issues (Cont.) • Acceptance of data merging College of MedicineResearch Funding and Lab Space (old) Of the 215,637 ft2 dedicated to research: 173,986 ft2(or 81%) are labs assigned to individual researchers 41,651 ft2 (or 19%) are research support space not assigned to individual researchers (e.g. cold rooms, shared equipment rooms, dark rooms) Of the 173,986 ft2 of labs assigned to individual researchers: 6,239 ft2 of labs are listed as vacant (undergoing renovations, holding for recruitment of new faculty, etc.) Leaving 167,747 ft2 lab space currently assigned to individual researchers AIR

  28. Cultural Issues (Cont.) • Acceptance of data merging College of MedicineResearch Funding and Lab Space (Cont.) The 167,747 ft2 of lab space is assigned to 187 researchers: The average lab assigned to a researcher is 897 ft2 In addition, there is an additional 223 ft2(on average) of common support space available to each researcher AIR

  29. $ 42,391,070 in Total Awards $ 32,294,546 of Direct Costs $ 10,096,525 of Indirect Costs or $ 253/ft2 or $ 193/ft2 or $ 60/ft2 Total Awards: Direct Costs: Indirect Costs: $ 316/ft2 $ 241/ft2 $ 75/ft2 Cultural Issues (Cont.) • Acceptance of data merging College of MedicineResearch Funding and Lab Space(Cont.) The awards that require the 167,747 ft2laboratory space total Under the best and realistic scenario, only ~80% of researchers are funded at any moment (due to unfunded periods between grants, recruitment of junior faculty without funding, etc.). Recomputed, the funding per ft2 becomes: AIR

  30. Cultural Issues (Cont.) • More refined $/NSF AIR

  31. The SPACE (Space Productivity And Cost Evaluation) Consortium • Established to: • facilitate inter-institutional assessment of space utilizing common methodologies and terminology; • share non-proprietary tools useful in managing space and in building comparative information; and • begin to define acceptable practices in management of space. AIR

  32. The SPACE Consortium (Cont.) Vision: To have a secure Web portal through which member institutions can obtain data elements from any or all member institutions. Information will be considered as privileged. Structure: A Governing Board will be made up of a representative from each member institution. Membership: Institutions must have space data of value, be willing to share data and expertise, and have sign-off by highest official. Cost: We anticipate no consortium fee. We are attempting to secure grant funding for its initial phases. AIR

  33. Stage 1: We will review your current space database for design, fields, usefulness, and electronic portability. (Some schools can go directly to Stage 4.) Stage 2: Assess shortcomings and overcome them. Stage 3: We will develop a web prototype, and will upload the system onto your platform. Stage 4: The prototype is fully functional and can share information with members of the SPACE Consortium. Suggested Implementation Procedures AIR

  34. SPACEConsortium web page: The Consortium web page is currently being constructed. A first draft can be viewed at http://www.clemson.edu/oir/Space/SAMS.htm. This page contains presentations, sample reports, and our contact information. AIR

More Related