The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 1 - 66

Michael L. Sanseviro

Foundation, Unaffiliated-Nonprofit Corporation, and Fully Privatized Development. These models primarily address the development and funding of public-private projects, but the approaches to management can vary. A traditional college- or university-sponsored model assumes a moderate level of risk, but high control and return. Many housing programs across the country have historically followed this model, treating housing as a student service or auxiliary enterprise of the institution or some combination thereof. In a college- or university-affiliated foundation model, a nonprofit entity, such as a university foundation, develops the project and leases it to the institution. The risk, return, and control are all moderate, and the institution typically maintains the ultimate decision-making responsibility for how the facility will be managed once it is leased back to the college or university. The unaffiliated nonprofit corporation model usually involves a nonprofit corporation that is not affiliated with the institution. The corporation either leases institutional land or purchases nearby land to own and to use for the project. The institution may lease the housing back and choose to fully operate it or may enter into an alternative operational arrangement with the unaffiliated corporation. In this model, the risk is low, but return and control are also typically low. The fully privatized model involves a private developer who may lease land from the institution or may acquire private land and fully own, develop, finance, and operate the housing, typically similar to an off-campus complex. Various arrangements for exclusive marketing and referrals or overflow housing guarantees may be desired (or required) by the private developer. There is typically no or low

Particularly when private management is involved in the partnership, students and parents can become easily confused over roles and authority and may engage the wrong parties to resolve certain problems, or they may develop an impression of the institution based on experiences with third-party vendors that may or may not represent the college or university .

risk for the institution in this model, but also low or no return and typically no control. Regardless of the public-private approaches selected in designing, developing, building, and managing student housing, or many other institutional projects for that matter, there are some important benefits and challenges. Some of the benefits may include being able to respond more quickly to market demands and current trends and to increase housing inventory more quickly through a partnership. Private funds may be less restrictive, and decision-making timetables can often be escalated if traditional RFP processes can be streamlined. Particularly when an institution lacks the necessary expertise, a partnership can enable the college or university to remain focused on its core mission. In some scenar-

66

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITy STUDENT HOUSING
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 37, No. 1
