The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2 - 84

Cynthia P. Balogh • Kasey Price • James Day • Rita Moser

plicable to housing officers. Eventually, the researchers sought assistance with this project in order to enhance the survey’s effectiveness and to increase accessibility of the information. In 2002, MGT of America, Inc., a national research and planning consulting firm, was brought in to assist with this effort. Based in Tallahassee, Florida, MGT specializes in higher education issues and has provided the resources and staffing to support this project at no cost to ACUHO-I. In order to increase accessibility and to provide for the most accurate reporting possible, the survey was converted to an online format. It was expanded under the guidance of a team of 20 chief housing officer advisors to include several additional sections, enhancing the breadth of information collected. Fortytwo institutions were invited to participate in a pilot test of the revised survey in the spring of 2003. As a result, 30 colleges and universities responded with information regarding recent construction and renovation projects on their campuses, as well as suggestions for improving the survey. Since then, the survey has been conducted every other year. The following sections highlight the most recent administration of the survey to all ACUHO-I members in January 2008, as well as some trends observed from earlier iterations.

were contacted via e-mail to participate. Of these, 244 respondents completed the survey, for a response rate of 28.9%. ACUHO-I members were sent an e-mail in January 2008 detailing the purpose of the survey and providing a link to the Web site where the survey was located, as well as the secure user name and password information for access. The password contributed to the security of the data and also provided a method of saving each participant’s data so that it was possible to return to the survey at a later time to complete or update responses. Reminder e-mails were sent to participants in the weeks following distribution, and they were asked to complete the survey no later than February 15, 2008.

Survey Instrument
The survey instrument was organized into several sections, including • contact information • institutional characteristics • facilities planning initiatives • new construction projects • renovation projects • survey feedback • unit/floor plans and photos (if relevant) Depending on how participants responded to certain questions, they would see the portions of the survey instrument that were applicable to their situation. For instance, if participants responded that they had not completed any new construction projects, then they would automatically skip this section. In this way, the survey was tailored somewhat for individuals and their unique situations.

METHODOLOGY
Participants and Procedure
Study participants included members of ACUHO-I as of fall 2007, who reported on projects completed from the beginning of the Winter 2006 term through the end of the Fall 2007 term. Initially, 843 chief housing officers

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITy STUDENT HOUSING

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 36, No. 2