1 / 1

STARS as a Tool for Planning Chuck McClaugherty and Natalie Kee University of Mount Union, Alliance, OH 44601.

ona
Download Presentation

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. STARS as a Tool for PlanningChuck McClaugherty and Natalie KeeUniversity of Mount Union, Alliance, OH 44601 BACKGROUND: The University of Mount Union is a predominantly undergraduate institution with 2200 students. We have signed the ACUPCC and approved a Campus Sustainability Plan that mirrors the organization of the STARS program and helps direct the sustainability initiatives in all campus operations. STARS is AASHE’s recently developed Sustainability, Tracking, Assessment and Rating System. We were participants of the STARS pilot program and as a charter participant we received a Bronze STARS rating in 2011. PLAN ORGANIZATION: Our Sustainability Plan incorporates a Climate Action Plan into the beginning of the document. This was done to satisfy the requirements of the ACUPCC. We felt that we could not meet our ACUPCC commitments without having a broader campus sustainability plan. The rest of the plan is divided into three sections, based on the three sections of the STARS program: • Education and Research (ER) • Operations (OP) • Planning, Administration, and Engagement (PAE) Each section provides a brief history of our accomplishments and status in that particular area, as well as our immediate and longer-term goals. IMPLEMENTATION, REVISION AND ASSESSMENT: Our Sustainability Management Advisory Committee (SMAC) is the body responsible for the implementation, revision, and assessment of the plan. To that end, the SMAC is divided into three sections, again corresponding to the three sections of the STARS program. Each working group, Education and Research, Operations, and Planning, Administration, and Engagement, is responsible for periodically reviewing their section of the Sustainability Plan to suggest additions and corrections and to help assess their accomplishments and plan their activities for the future. The SMAC is a University-wide committee comprised of faculty, staff, students, and community members that reports to the President’s office. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to create a campus-wide sustainability plan that would help us weave sustainability into the fabric of our institution and make significant strides in overall campus sustainability. OUTCOMES: . As a result of our planning we have made some significant strides. For example, the ER group initiated a program for enhancing sustainability across the curriculum and is currently developing an Eco Reps program. The OP task group has metered all buildings for utilities and is developing a building by building energy and water use reporting system. Additionally, they pursued and received Tree Campus USA status. The PAE group launched a week long City-wide Sustainability Festival during October of 2010 and is participating in a month-long festival this October. The PAE group also implemented a new electronic payroll system that eliminates all paper timecards, deposit receipts and W-2s. Additionally we have achieved more than 3% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions while increasing our building area and student enrollment over the last two years. INTRODUCTION: As we began to develop our plan we wanted something that kept several goals in mind. We wanted a plan that: • included a climate action plan that would meet our ACUPCC commitments, • involved all aspects of our institution including curriculum, operations, and administration, • would be challenging but reachable, • could be assessed internally, and • could be benchmarked against other similar institutions.

More Related