VI-54

Article VI.

Section 6.4: Physical Resources

Committee Members

Carol B. Diminnie, Chair

Dean, Graduate School

Terence A. Dalrymple, Editor

Department of English

Don Abell

Alumnus

Molly J. Allison

Department of Nursing

Marc Cossich

University Police

Jay Halbert

Physical Plant

Pamela S. Lee

Department of Music

John H. Nicholson

Department of Communications, Drama, & Journalism

Satcha Pretto

Undergraduate Student

Virgie Sellers

Alumnus

Catherine W. Talley

Department of Mathematics

VI-55

6.4. Physical Resources

This section presents the Self-Study Physical Resources Committee‟s evaluation of Angelo State

University‟s physical resources, space management, maintenance of buildings, grounds, and

equipment, safety and security, and facilities master plan. It does not discuss instructional support

equipment such as computers or library acquisitions because the Library and Learning Resources

Committee and the Instructional Support/Information Technology Committee examine these

resources in sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3. The Committee finds that the University‟s physical resources

comply with the standards in the Criteria.

Physical resources, including buildings and equipment used both on campus and off campus,

must be adequate to serve the needs of the institution in relation to its stated purpose, its

programs and activities.

The University is in compliance.

Angelo State University (ASU) had an enrollment of 6,309 students in the Fall 2000 semester. To

support these students as they pursue degrees in a wide variety of programs in many fields of study,

ASU has a 268-acre campus with a physical plant valued at $162,350,000. Sixty-one percent of the

buildings have been either constructed or renovated within the last twenty years. This report describes

all the major facilities, and the Campus Master Plan contains a comprehensive list.

As the mission statement specifies, “Angelo State University is committed to providing a wide range

of high quality academic programs and strives to develop in its students those qualities which will

enable them to enrich their personal lives, improve their abilities to serve and contribute to society,

and become leaders in their professions and in their communities.” The physical resources described

below are adequate to support these high quality programs and their supporting activities.

Buildings for Instruction

Nine on-site buildings, totaling 563,073 square feet, are mainly used for instructional purposes. These

buildings house the academic departments and include classrooms, computer laboratories, science

laboratories, art studios, music practice rooms, large lecture halls, and other facilities necessary for

the education of students. Table 6.4.a lists particulars for each of the nine buildings.

VI-56

Table 6.4.a

On-site Buildings for Instruction

Building Name Building Use (Space assignments are projected to change in Fall, 2001.)

Total area

square feet

Academic Academic (English, History, Modern Languages,

Psychology and Sociology)

Academic support (computer laboratory, modern

language laboratory, networked writing classroom)

58,632

Carr Education-Fine Arts Academic (Art and Music, Education, Drama*)

Academic support (modular theater, recital hall, band

hall, music practice rooms, art studios, interactive video

classroom)

*The Communications, Drama, and Journalism

Department faculty and facilities are divided between

the Hardeman and Carr buildings.

80,184

Cavness Science Academic (Biology, Chemistry)

Academic support (science laboratories, large lecture

hall)

82,543

Continuing Studies Center Academic support (Adult and Continuing Education,

individualized testing)

2,592

Hardeman Administration-

Communication/Journalism

Academic (Communications, Drama, and Journalism)

Academic support (computer laboratory, television

laboratory, student newspaper facilities, photo

laboratory)

Admissions and Retention, Registrar, Student Life,

Educational Opportunity Services, Residence Life,

Veterans‟ Affairs

24,592

Mathematics-Computer

Science

Academic (Computer Science, Mathematics)

Academic support (computer laboratories, distance

learning facilities, multi-media center, auditorium)

West Texas Disaster Recovery Center (see chapter 4-

Outreach)

86,248

Center for Human

Performance

Academic (Kinesiology)

Academic support (gymnasium, pool, weight room,

dance studio, racquetball courts)

81,325

Rassman Business Academic (Accounting, Economics, and Finance,

Aerospace Studies, Business Administration,

Government)

Academic support (computer laboratories,

microcomputer services center, Information

Technology, International Trade Office, Small Business

Development Center)

62,162

Vincent Nursing-Physical

Science

Academic (Agriculture, Nursing, Physics, Physical

Therapy, Graduate School)

Academic support (science laboratories, computer

laboratories, cadaver laboratory, planetarium)

84,795

VI-57

In addition to these buildings, plans are underway for a new cadaver laboratory, which is temporarily

housed in the Vincent Building, to support the newly established Physical Therapy Department. An

expansion of the library, a new art building, and an expansion of the science building are also in the

Campus Master Plan.

Other Buildings

ASU‟s on-site buildings also include the Administration Building, the University Clinic, the Food

Service Center, the Physical Plant complex, the University Police station, the Porter Henderson

Library, the Alumni Affairs building, and the recently renovated Houston Harte University Center

(UC).

The UC was reopened during the Fall Semester 2000 after being closed for renovations for almost

two years. Renovations costing $9.2 million increased the floor space from 96,000 square feet to

130,000 square feet. The UC is now a beautiful building with state-of-the-art technology and modern,

comfortable meeting rooms that the entire ASU community may enjoy. These new facilities, which

can be reserved for conferences, accommodate as many as one thousand participants and afford up to

fifteen breakout rooms for educational sessions.

The UC also houses a credit union, which makes on-campus banking possible for the first time at

ASU. Student organizations and clubs now have office space with computers in the UC‟s Ram

Central Station. The Dr. Ralph R. Chase West Texas Collection (WTC) moved from the library to the

UC during the Fall Semester 2000. The mission of the WTC is to collect, store, preserve, and make

accessible for scholarly research selected historical and genealogical manuscripts, records, books, and

pictorial and other related materials. Table 6.4.b provides details about on-site buildings primarily

used for purposes other than instruction.

VI-58

Table 6.4.b

Other On-Site Buildings

Building Name Building Use Total area

square feet

Administration Personnel Office, Academic Affairs, Carr

Scholarship Office, Financial Aid Office,

Fiscal Affairs, Institutional Planning, Research and

Assessment, Internal Auditor, News and

Information, Risk Management, University

Relations and Development, Offices for the

President and Vice-Presidents

39,202

Clinic Student health provider, counseling services 8,119

Food Service Center Chartwell‟s Cafeteria and Food Court 20,982

Physical Plant complex Building and Vehicle Maintenance, Equipment,

Warehousing and Grounds

34,489

Police Campus security, vehicle registration and parking 1,200

Porter Henderson Library 1.2 million holdings, Language Learning

Laboratory, computer laboratory

78,926

Alumni Affairs Alumni Relations 1,500

Houston Harte University

Center

ASU Bookstore, Chartwell‟s Dining and Catering

Services, Food Court and Snack Bar, Concho

Educators Federal Credit Union, West Texas

Collection, Ram Central Station, Post Office, Center

for Career Development, Game Room, Student Life

Office, Student Senate, University Center Director's

Office, UC Program Office

130,000

Residence Halls

ASU has eight residential halls, including two ten-story high rises and one apartment complex. About

60% of the dorm rooms are wired for Internet access, and plans are underway to wire all the rooms

within the next two to three years.

The total capacity for these halls is 1,612. In the Fall, 2000 semester, 1,481 students lived on campus,

which represents a 92% occupancy rate. The current residential halls are adequate to house the

number of students who either choose to live on campus or are required to live on campus. The table

below specifies the type and occupancy rates of ASU student housing.

VI-59

Table 6.4.c

Residence Halls

Residence Hall Description 2000 Fall Term Occupancy

Carr 2 students/room suite arrangement 81 out of 98

Mayer 1 student/room, upperclassmen 33 out of 43

Runnels 1 student/room, upperclasswomen 40 out of 41

Men‟s High Rise 2 students/room suite arrangement 394 out of 457

Women‟s High Rise 2 students/room suite arrangement 456 out of 465

Massie Men‟s 2 students/room, upperclassmen 171 out of 178

Massie Women‟s 2 student/room, upperclasswomen 172 out of 178

Vanderventer Apartments 4-student/2 bedroom apt. 134 out of 152

The Student Development Services subcommittee is charged with evaluating the quality of the

residence halls under “Student Development Services” (Section 5.4.3.4).

Physical Activity Facilities

Because of the identified need for increased physical activity facilities (see ASU‟s 1990 Self Study

Report), in the past ten years Angelo State University has completed several expansion projects

including soccer fields and two new lighted softball fields for women‟s athletics. A new all-weather

outdoor basketball and recreational pavilion is located adjacent to the Men‟s and Women‟s High Rise

Residence Halls. The athletic needs of students are also met with the Center for Human Performance,

the 16,824 square foot Athletic Field House, the Multipurpose Sports Complex, intramural fields, and

tennis courts (six of which are lighted).

Current construction includes the 135,000 square foot $21 million Junell Center. When completed,

the new facility will provide a first-class setting for educational, cultural, social, and athletic events

for audiences up to 6,500. The Center will enable ASU to bring commencement activities, currently

staged off campus in the city‟s coliseum, home to the campus.

Off-Campus Facilities

ASU‟s off-campus facilities include the Management, Instruction, and Research Center (MIR

Center), access to the Texas A&M University Research and Extension Center, the West Texas

Training Center (WTTC), the San Angelo Museum of Fine Arts Education Center (the Ceramics

Studio), the ASU Lake House, and the President‟s Residence.

The MIR Center is located on the north shore of O.C. Fisher Reservoir, six miles from San Angelo. A

multi-million dollar complex at the Center includes four instructional and research laboratories for

animal science, animal anatomy and physiology, animal reproduction, animal nutrition, wildlife

VI-60

management, wool and mohair technology, and plant and range sciences. The MIR Center operates

under a twenty-five-year lease from the U.S. Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army.

The Texas A&M University Agricultural Research and Extension Center is located adjacent to the

MIR Center and is available for specialized instructional needs of ASU students majoring in Animal

Science.

The WTTC is a collaborative educational effort involving ASU, Howard College, the San Angelo

Independent School District, and the City of San Angelo. The purpose of the WTTC is to assist West

Texas and the Concho Valley in developing a trained and qualified workforce. The WTTC is housed

in the old Levi Strauss Building on the north side of San Angelo. The building is being remodeled in

three stages. Once remodeling of the building is complete, students will be able to enroll in a number

of technical courses and programs as well as Adult and Continuing Education courses. Howard

College classes began at the WTTC in January of 2001 in the Stage I remodeled area. ASU is the

fiscal agent of the WTTC; the University does not offer any credit-bearing courses there.

The city of San Angelo in collaboration with ASU completed a 26,832 square foot Museum of Fine

Arts in 1999. ASU contributed approximately $5.5 million to its construction and operates a 2,889

square foot Education Center that houses a state-of-the-art ceramics studio and offices for the Art

faculty.

Angelo State‟s Lake House is located on approximately four acres of property leased from the city of

San Angelo at the northeast shore of Lake Nasworthy. Facilities include a recreation center containing

3,114 square feet, a boat dock, volleyball courts, playground equipment, and a staff residence.

Facilities are used mainly for recreational purposes and meetings.

The President‟s residence has 7,500 square feet of space and is located about two blocks from the

campus. Meetings, social functions related to University events, and faculty get-togethers are also

held in the President‟s home.

ASU also uses the Education Building at Goodfellow Air Force Base to teach classes. Members of the

armed forces, as well as other ASU students, may take classes on base.

Plans are underway for the construction of the Rao Alumni and Visitors Center. Funded by the ASU

Alumni Association, this new facility will be home to ASU alumni, will include a ballroom and a

computer laboratory, and will house the Small Business Development Center.

Survey Results for Physical Resources

In the Fall, 2000 semester, faculty, administration, staff, and students were asked to complete surveys

for the self-study. The faculty, staff and administrators overwhelmingly replied that the campus is

VI-61

pleasing (modes of 4, 5, 5, respectively, where 4=agree and 5=strongly agree). Both graduate and

undergraduate students responded that the University provides appropriate physical facilities to

support the educational programs (medians and modes of 4). Further, the majority of the faculty

stated that the physical environment contributes to effective learning (median and mode of 4).

As the surveys and the other cited documentation demonstrates, the physical resources at Angelo

State University are more than adequate to serve the needs of the institution in relation to its stated

purpose, its programs and its activities.

6.4.1 Space Management

Space allocated to any institutional function must be adequate for the effective conduct of that

function.

The University is in compliance.

The Campus Space Planning Committee consists of the vice presidents, academic deans, the

Administrative Assistant and Coordinator of Special Activities, the directors of Athletics and of

Information Technology, a Faculty Senate member, and two students. The Committee evaluates space

allocation/reallocation requests and recommends action to the President. The Vice President for

Academic Affairs chairs this committee. The responsibilities of this committee are

1. to develop a process for the permanent assignment of campus space;

2. to recommend allocation of space to the President based on this process;

3. to serve as an advisory group to the President and the architectural consultant

for the Campus Master Plan.

Under the former Vice President for Academic Affairs, the committee did not meet formally, but the

polled members recommended the following space changes: relocation of the Government and

Agriculture Departments, new space for the English Department, assignment of the former Home

Economics Cottage to Continuing Studies, and assignment of space to the new Physical Therapy

Department. The President approved the committee‟s recommendations. Under the current VPAA,

the committee has begun meeting formally.

The President makes all major space decisions at the University level. Depending upon the type of

construction (new building construction or renovation) and the cost of each project, the President‟s

decision is either final or is sent to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB).

The decision to seek new construction projects begins when the need for new space becomes large

enough to justify consideration. The decision-making process involves analyses of many factors-cost

VI-62

effectiveness, necessity and centrality of programming needs, overall costs, alternative solutions,

internal and external constraints, funding options, debt service, and competing initiatives.

Ideas/requests for new construction can begin at any level but must eventually receive approval from

the appropriate unit head, dean, and vice president, and then from the president, chancellor, Board of

Regents, and Coordinating Board. Approval for projects above the thresholds established by the

Coordinating Board requires that the projects be included in the Campus Facilities Master Plan.

Funding for approved projects must be included in the University‟s Operating Budget.

Similarly, ideas/requests for space renovation can begin at any level, but must eventually receive

approval from the unit head, dean, vice president and president, and funding must be included in the

University Operating Budget. If the renovation project is large enough in cost or scope, approval by

the chancellor, Board of Regents and Coordinating Board may be required.

Results from the Fall 2000 Self-Study Surveys of students, administrators, faculty, and staff show

some mixed responses in regard to facilities, as the following table demonstrates.

Table 6.4.1.a

Survey Results for Space Management

Faculty Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 Office space is adequate. 6.1 22.2 8.1 54.8 9.1

4 4 Classrooms are adequate. 4.7 10.4 39.9 36.3 8.8

3 3 Laboratories are adequate. 11.6 18.2 7.1 43.9 19.2

3 4 Storage space is adequate. 17.8 27.9 15.2 31.0 8.1

4 4 (Library) Physical facilities meet

my needs. 0.5 3.0 6.6 67.0 2.8

Undergraduate Student Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 University provides appropriate

physical facilities. 1.6 10.2 14.5 54.5 19.2

4 4 Library physical facilities meet

my needs. 1.5 4.2 17.1 50.2 27.0

4 4 Space allocation is adequate and

appropriate for classrooms. 3.0 10.1 5.2 57.7 24.0

4 4 Space allocation is adequate and

appropriate for labs. 3.2 7.1 14.7 54.0 21.0

VI-63

Master’s Student Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 University provides appropriate

physical facilities. 2.4 6.7 12.1 54.5 24.2

4 4 Library physical facilities meet

my needs. 0.6 3.0 4.2 57.6 34.5

4 4 Space allocation is adequate and

appropriate for classrooms. 3.0 4.8 3.6 55.7 32.9

4 4 Space allocation is adequate and

appropriate for labs. 5.4 3.4 15.6 47.6 27.9

Staff Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 Office/work space is adequate

for me to do my job. 11.5 20.0 3.0 41.8 23.6

4 4 Storage space is adequate for me

to do my job. 18.8 22.4 4.2 37.6 17.0

Administrator Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

2 2 Office space is adequate. 10.5 47.4 10.5 21.1 10.5

1 1 Storage space is adequate. 52.6 23.7 15.8 7.9 0.0

1- SD= Strongly Disagree, 2- D= Disagree, 3-NS= Not Sure, 4- A= Agree, 5-SA= Strongly Agree

Overall, responses from all constituents except administrators show a favorable attitude towards space

management on campus. The most frequent response regarding adequacy of office space, classrooms,

laboratories and storage space was “agree” (mode of four for all items). A majority of administrators

(which includes department heads) disagreed that office space and storage space were adequate

(modes of two and one, respectively). Storage space, as reported by faculty and staff, although

adequate overall (modes of four), shows some deficiencies in certain areas of campus, as 46% of

faculty and 41% of staff disagreed or strongly disagreed that storage space is adequate.

Student satisfaction with the physical facilities was high overall, both on the graduate and

undergraduate levels. Modes of 4 were reported for University physical facilities, library physical

facilities, classroom space, and laboratory space. Faculty considered the laboratories and library

physical facilities to be adequate for meeting their needs, reporting a 63% and 90% favorable rating,

respectively.

The Space Projection Model for Public Universities, Technical Colleges, and the Lamar Centers

distributed by the THECB, Division of Finance, Campus Planning and Research, predicts the

educational and general (E&G) space required for a public university or technical college to fulfill its

mission of teaching, research, and public service (November, 1998, p. 2). The space needs are divided

into five categories: teaching, library, research, office, and support space.

VI-64

The spaces at Angelo State University were evaluated using the space projection model. Table 6.4.1.b

contains the results.

Table 6.4.1.b.

Predicted and Actual Square Footage

Angelo State University (Fall 2000)

Predicted St. Ft. Actual Sq. Ft.

Surplus/Deficit

St. Ft.

Surplus/Deficit

Percentage

Teaching 270,404 261,517 -8,887 -3.28%

Library 83,250 78,209* -5,041 -16.49%

Research 15,822 13,110 -2,712 -17.1%

Office 123,964 99,638 -24,326 -19.6%

Support 44,410 43,856 -554 -1.2%

Total 537,850 499,664 -38,186 -7.64%

*This figure represents 64, 392 sq. ft. of assigned area in the library building plus 13,817 sq. ft. of the

West Texas Collection, located in the UC.

All of the space categories are deficient based upon the predictions established by the THECB.

Teaching and support space essentially meet predictions of the recommended square footage.

Research, library and office square footages are deficient by between 16.49% and 19.6%.

Funding has been approved for the expansion of the library and of the Cavness Science building, and

the Junell Center is scheduled to open by the end of 2001. The library addition will provide faculty

office space, in addition to housing the Center for Academic Excellence and library space. Moreover,

the Junell Center will contain office space that may be used for a variety of University administrative

or academic needs. These three building projects should bring the research, office, and library space

to within the predicted space.

As another means of evaluating the adequacy of space management, Table 6.4.1.c provides

information about classroom and class laboratory utilization.

VI-65

Table 6.4.1.c

Classroom and Class Lab Utilization Summaries*

Fall 1999

Number of

Class Labs/

Classrooms

Fall 1999

Average

Weekly Hours

of Use

Fall 2000

Average

Weekly

Hours of Use

Class Lab Utilization 39 26.7 hrs.** 14.0 hrs.

THECB State Standard for Classroom Use 25.0 hrs. 25.0 hrs.

Hours of use above/(below) the THECB

State Standards

+1.7 hrs. -11.0 hrs.

Average Class Lab Utilization - Public

Universities

19.3 hrs. 19.5 hrs.

**Probably incorrect data

Fall 1999

Number of

Class Labs/

Classrooms

Fall 1999

Average

Weekly Hours

of Use

Fall 2000

Average

Weekly

Hours of Use

Classroom Utilization 81 27.8 hrs. 27.7 hrs.

THECB State Standard for Classroom Use 38.0 hrs. 38.0 hrs.

Hours of use above/(below) the THECB

State Standards

-10.2 hrs. -10.3 hrs.

Average Classroom Utilization - Public

Universities

30.5 hrs. 32.6 hrs.

*Source: Institutions' Facilities Inventory and Fall 1999 CBM005 Building and Room Use Report

**Probably incorrect data

Angelo State University‟s class laboratory and classroom utilization rates rank twenty-eighth highest

and twenty-ninth highest, respectively, among the thirty-four public universities included in the list.

Two reasons may explain the low usage averages. The high employment rate of our students

precludes scheduling very many afternoon classes. Several labs are so specialized that only one type

of activity may be scheduled in that space (i.e. cadaver lab, cell biology lab).

Faculty, staff and students indicate general satisfaction with the physical facilities, while

administrators were more critical of the adequacy of office spaces and classrooms. Both faculty and

staff expressed a need for more storage space. Current and planned expansions will ease the office

problem. Conversion of the Field House to a storage facility as soon as the Junell Center opens will

ease the storage space problem. In practice, ASU‟s physical spaces are currently adequate.

VI-66

6.4.2 Buildings, Grounds, and Equipment Maintenance

An institution must have a plan for the upkeep of its property. At a minimum, the plan must

address routine, preventative and deferred maintenance of buildings, equipment and

grounds.

The Director of the Physical Plant generates a five-year master plan, called the Five Year Deferred

Maintenance Plan, for scheduled and preventative maintenance every budget cycle. This plan is kept

on file in the Physical Plant office and in the Fiscal Office.

The plan is designed in keeping with the mission of the Physical Plant: to provide the University with

a physical environment supportive of the institutional focus on quality education and of the Physical

Plant‟s goals: to maintain building structures and mechanical systems, keep buildings clean and safe,

maintain the grounds and keep all associated equipment safe and in proper working order.

The Physical Plant has four major departments: Administrative Support Staff, Grounds Maintenance,

Housekeeping, and Trades (such as heating and air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, automotive,

painting). The plant presently employs over seventy employees. All plant employees report to the

Physical Plant Director and the Physical Plant Assistant Director, who report to the Vice President of

Fiscal Affairs. The Physical Plant Director and Assistant Director use consulting engineers, architects,

contractors, and other professionals as required to complete assigned projects or tasks effectively and

efficiently.

The Plant staff performs most of the normal maintenance. However, major work will be contracted

due to financial or time constraints. Some routine maintenance of the grounds and custodial services

are contracted. All of the Physical Plant shops are involved in maintenance, minor construction,

and/or custodial and setup duties.

The Physical Plant maintains a large storage warehouse for supplies, materials, and staging for large

projects. Plans are presently in place to convert the Field House (22,324 sq. ft.) for use as a

warehouse and storage facility by January 2002.

Where appropriate, it should verify the estimated costs of maintenance as well as when and how

it is to be performed. There should be a written schedule for regular maintenance

activities and a written record of projects completed. The plan must be operational and

evaluated annually.

The University is in compliance.

Annual budgets are prepared and submitted in March for approval in August. The Physical Plant

Director generates planned projects for annual budgets with input from Physical Plant staff,

VI-67

University Housing, department heads, and administrators. The Physical Plant operates on a budget of

over seven million dollars a year, including utilities. Over the past five years, the Physical Plant has

increased its preventative maintenance program, which has reduced the number of after-hour calls

and emergencies. The Physical Plant maintains annual service contracts on its chillers, boilers, EMS

systems, fire alarm and sprinkler systems, and elevators. The Physical Plant documents all planning

and budget matters and submits them to the Vice President for Fiscal Affairs. The Vice-Presidents,

President, Board of Regents, and Coordinating Board evaluate and approve these projects and

budgets, and records are kept at the Physical Plant and the Office of Fiscal Affairs.

A facilities management software program tracks work orders received and generated by the Physical

Plant. This automated system also tracks other items: inventory, equipment repairs, automotive

repairs, and employee hours. Faculty, staff, administrators and Physical Plant employees generate

work orders, and once these are generated, shop supervisors assign the work to individual workers

according to skill levels. Workers receive and order supplies at the central stores supply window, and

bar coding tracks these supplies. All supply inventories are also tracked by bar coding that integrates

with the automated work order system.

Maintenance of buildings, grounds and equipment is proactive, planned, and documented. The

facilities management system allows continuous tracking, evaluation and upkeep of routine,

preventative and deferred maintenance for the University. Maintenance schedules are available in the

Physical Plant office.

The Five Year Deferred Maintenance Plan is evaluated monthly by the Physical Plant Administration

to determine if projects are completed in a timely manner to meet the goals of the Plan. Projects that

cannot be completed during their planned budget cycle will be re-evaluated and scheduled for the

next budget cycle. The Physical Plan also submits annual Institutional Effectiveness reports.

Survey Results for Buildings, Grounds, and Equipment Maintenance

Surveys were distributed to Administration, Faculty, and Staff addressing issues related to

maintenance. Table 6.4.2.a reports results.

VI-68

Table 6.4.2.a

Survey Results for Buildings, Grounds, and Equipment Maintenance

Staff Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

5 5 The appearance of the campus

is pleasing. 0 2.4 0.6 43.7 53.3

4 4 The buildings are adequately

maintained. 4.8 19.3 6.6 52.4 16.9

Administrator Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

5 5 The appearance of the campus

is pleasing. 2.6 2.6 0 39.5 55.3

4 4 The buildings are adequately

maintained. 8.1 13.5 5.4 37.8 35.1

Faculty Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 The appearance of the campus

is pleasing. 0.5 1.5 1.5 53.3 43.1

4 4 The buildings are adequately

maintained. 3.0 14.6 13.1 52.0 17.2

1-SD = strongly disagree, 2-D = disagree, 3-NS = not sure, 4-A = agree, 5-SA = strongly agree

The Staff, Administrative and Faculty surveys indicated that over 94% agree or strongly agree that

the appearance of campus is pleasing and over 68% agree or strongly agree that the buildings are

adequately maintained.

6.4.3 Safety and Security

The institution must take reasonable steps to provide a healthful, safe, and secure environment

for all members of the campus community.

The University is in compliance.

ASU meets this imperative through the collaborative programs and initiatives of the University

Health Clinic, Office of Risk Management, and University Police. The President and Vice Presidents

provide strong and active support, as does the University‟s Administrative Council, Faculty Senate,

and key departments such as the Physical Plant and Student Life. Additionally, surveys are conducted

to determine if the campus community is satisfied with the levels of safety and security at this

institution.

VI-69

Health Clinic and Health Insurance

For students, the Health Clinic provides appropriate care, including diagnosis, treatment, referral off-

campus, and medical services on campus for routine illness, minor injuries, testing, immunizations,

and counseling/health services. For faculty and staff, the University provides comprehensive health

insurance.

Office of Risk Management

The Office of Risk Management provides comprehensive administrative policies and procedures

related to workplace safety and health of state employees, as well as students and the public. These

policies include hazard communication, fire prevention and protection, and emergency response.

These plans were formalized in March 1998, and are now accessible on the Risk Management web

site (http://www.angelo.edu/services/risk_management). The Physical Plant staff of craft workers

have a separate manual of procedures and work practices (also on the Risk Management web site).

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) monitors ASU safety and health activities and

conditions by means of on-site audits and assessments of workers‟ compensation claims sent to

Austin, Texas, for processing. This audit consists of OSHA-style facilities inspections, as well as

program evaluations. No findings are unabated as of January 1, 2001, and the latest report (letter of

March 10, 2000 “State Office of Risk Management Program Review”) is in the documents file.

ASU‟s response to this letter is also in the file. An important indication of effectiveness of the loss

control programs at ASU is the injury frequency rate for each fiscal year. SORM has four levels of

awards for success as measured by improvement in reportable occurrence of accidents/injuries. ASU

has won all four awards in the past four years culminating in the "Texas State Agency Excellence"

award for fiscal year 1999. There is only one state agency selected for this award, referred to as the

"Best of the Best" in the field of safety and health. Twelve state agencies who managed a 50%

reduction in injury frequency were competing for the top award, which takes into consideration all

administrative programs and initiatives.

During annual visits to the campus, the State Fire Marshal evaluates and monitors fire safety factors

in compliance with the National Fire Protection Association‟s “Life Safety Code.” The latest report,

entitled “Texas Department of Insurance State Fire Marshal‟s Office, Fifth Report on State University

Fire Safety Projects, To the Senate Finance Committee and House Appropriations Committee,” (6)

indicates that all previous findings by the fire marshal have been satisfactorily addressed as of

January 1, 2001.

VI-70

University Police

The University Police Department provides crime prevention and control, criminal investigations,

traffic and parking supervision, emergency first aid, the maintenance of public order, 24-hour-a-day

patrol protection on campus, and other related services. The University Police work cooperatively

with the local law enforcement agencies including the Tom Green County Sheriff‟s Department, San

Angelo Police Department, Department of Public Safety, Customs, Border Patrol, and FBI. Each

month all campus crime statistics are submitted to the Uniform Crime Reporting Bureau, Crime

Records Division in Austin, Texas. Crime prevention programs dealing with campus safety tips, theft

prevention, personal safety, and prevention of sexual assault are given to residence hall personnel and

students each semester.

Table 6.4.3 summarizes the University‟s crime statistics from 1997-99. As Table 6.4.3.a indicates,

ASU has a very safe and secure campus.

Table 6.4.3.a

Angelo State University Crime Statistics 1997-99

When there is a medical emergency on campus during normal working hours (9:00 a.m. –5:00 p.m.),

University Police will bring a nurse from the health clinic to the emergency site. After 5:00 p.m.,

University Police will go to the emergency site and will contact emergency services (fire department)

for assistance. More information about the University Police may be found on their web site

VI-71

(http://www.angelo.edu/faculty_staff/university_police.htm) and in the brochure included with the

documentation for this section.

Campus Community Safety and Security Surveys

Surveys of faculty, administration, staff, and students (graduate and undergraduate) indicate that the

majority is satisfied with services at the health clinic and campus security. Additionally, each group

surveyed perceives the campus environment as safe and healthy. These survey results are summarized

in the following table.

Table 6.4.3.b

Survey Results for Safety and Security

Faculty Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 The environment at ASU is healthful. 0.5 6.0 16.6 54.3 22.6

4 4 The environment at ASU is safe. 1.0 4.5 12.1 59.3 23.1

4 4 The environment is secure. 2.5 5.0 14 59.3 19.1

Administrator Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 The environment at ASU is healthful. 2.6 13.2 5.3 44.7 34.2

4.5 5 The environment at ASU is safe. 0 5.3 0 44.7 50.0

4 4 The environment is secure. 0 15.8 2.6 44.7 36.8

Staff Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 My work environment is healthful. 11.4 18.7 12.7 42.2 15.1

4 4 My work environment is safe. 4.2 7.9 9.1 52.7 26.1

Graduate Student Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 ASU provides a healthy environment. 0.6 0 3.0 52.5 38.9

4 4 ASU provides a safe environment. 0 1.2 6.64 38 17

4 4 I am satisfied with campus security. 3.1 6.2 26.7 51.6 12.4

4 4 I am satisfied with the health clinic. 6.0 5.3 28.0 44.0 16.7

Undergraduate Student Responses

Median Mode Question % SD % D % NS % A % SA

4 4 ASU provides a healthy environment. 0.7 4.1 4.9 59.0 31.3

4 4 ASU provides a safe environment. 1.1 4.1 7.5 56.2 31.1

4 4 I am satisfied with campus security. 6.1 7.6 21.7 44.9 19.8

4 4 I am satisfied with the health clinic. 3.6 9.1 20.6 44.3 22.5

1- SD= Strongly Disagree, 2- D= Disagree, 3-NS= Not Sure, 4- A= Agree, 5-SA= Strongly Agree

VI-72

Administrative responsibility for environmental health and safety programs must be assigned.

The University is in compliance.

The Risk Management Specialist, reporting to the Vice President for University Relations and

Development, is responsible for evaluation, assessment investigation, and tracking/trending of

conditions relating to environmental health and safety. The specialist provides new employee

orientation, conducts pre-employment physical capability assessment, and develops safety checklists

for special events on campus. Other activities of the Risk Management Specialist include developing

specialized training programs, conducting safety meetings, and monitoring activities/conditions. The

Risk Management Specialist acts as a liaison for state audits for Risk Management and fire

protection, and coordinates/implements abatement activity to insure compliance with applicable

standards and guidelines. All audit findings are addressed by specific actions designed to achieve

closure.

A comprehensive safety plan must be developed, implemented, and evaluated regularly. The

plan should give special attention to the adequate provision and use of safety equipment

in laboratories and other hazardous areas; to the modification of buildings, if necessary,

for easy egress in the event of fire or other emergency; and to familiarizing all building

occupants with emergency evacuation procedures.

The University is in compliance.

Safety at ASU is summarized in two documents--the Risk Management Health and Safety Policies

(effective 10/98) and Physical Plant Health and Safety Procedures (effective 10/99). The Director of

Risk Management is responsible for developing these comprehensive safety plans. These manuals

constitute a formal plan to ensure compliance with all provisions and standards of governmental

environment, health, and safety regulations. General information concerning safety issues is also

included in the Student Handbook and the Faculty-Staff Handbook.

The Risk Management Health and Safety Policies document contains (inter alia) chapters entitled

“Hazard Communication Program,” “Fire Prevention and Protection,” “Exposure Control, Blood

Borne Pathogens,” “Health and Safety Protection,” and “Emergency Response” which give special

attention to the adequate provision and use of safety equipment in laboratories and other hazardous

areas; emergency evacuation plans; and fire prevention and protection.

Evaluation of risk management activities includes annual reviews with various groups representative

of the campus population, including the Campus Safety and Security Committee, Academic Affairs

Deans, the Administrative Council, and the Risk Management Emergency Response Team.

VI-73

6.4.4 Facilities Master Plan

The institution must maintain a current written physical facilities master plan that provides for

the orderly future development of the institution and relates to other institutional

planning efforts.

The University is in compliance.

ASU maintains a current written facilities master plan (Campus Master Plan 1998-2003), a

continuation of previous facilities master planning efforts. This comprehensive systematic campus

plan is the basis for short-term and long-term campus development. The Campus Master Plan is a

direct result of a team effort that includes the University President, the University Vice Presidents,

and the Physical Plant Directors in consultation with University architectural services (DMS

Architectural Services) under the guidelines of The Texas State University System‟s (TSUS) Board of

Regents. The initial Campus Master Plan was developed in 1964 to guide the growth and expansion

of the newly authorized four-year college. The current plan was authorized in June, 1997, by the

Board of Regents, The TSUS, and served to update information regarding the existing campus and to

guide future planning for continued growth and development of the University. The data and resulting

recommendations were presented to and approved by the Board of Regents‟ Planning Committee

March 10, 1998. The planning period used coincides closely with that used by the State Legislature to

fund Educational and General building projects through the State Higher Education Assistance Fund.

The future orderly development of the institution is assessed every five years, when the plan is

reviewed and revised to encompass long-term educational and financial plans related to physical

resources. Ongoing development is closely assessed annually. Campus Planning Master Plan reports

made by the Vice President of Fiscal Affairs include the following:

New construction, Major R & R, Infrastructure, and Land Acquisitions;

Assessment of Deferred Maintenance and Demolition Needs;

Deferred Maintenance Five Year Plan 2001 to 2005;

Deferred Maintenance Expenditure FY 2000.

Thus, ASU is in compliance with the SACS requirement for a facilities master plan.

VI-74

Findings

Strengths

1. ASU has an attractive, modern, well-maintained campus.

2. The University has adequate facilities to meet the goals of the institution (especially when the

new building projects are completed).

3. The University has a very safe and secure campus.

4. ASU has several collaborative partnerships with state and city initiatives (West Texas

Disaster Recovery Center, West Texas Training Center, San Angelo Museum of Fine Arts).

5. The University relies on a minimal number of outside contractors for maintenance, reducing

response time for repairs.

6. The University has a well-qualified and licensed police force.

7. The University has a credentialed, dedicated risk management function keeping a focus on

adequate, effective loss control systems.

Weaknesses

1. ASU has a shortage of storage space.

2. The University‟s research and office space square footages fall below that predicted by the

Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board space model.

Recommendations and Suggestions

The Self-Study Steering Committee finds that ASU is in compliance with all requirements in Section

6.4 and therefore makes no recommendations or suggestions.

VI-75

Section 6.4—Physical Resources Compliance Grid

Must Statement Compliance

Status

Documentation

6.4 Physical Resources

Physical resources,

including buildings and

equipment both on and off

campus, must be adequate

to serve the needs of the

institution in relation to its

stated purpose, programs

and activities.

In

Compliance ASU Campus Master Plan 1998-2003

ASU Self Study Survey (Fall 2000)

6.4.1 Space Management

Space allocated to any

institutional function must

be adequate for the effective

conduct of that function.

In

Compliance Space Projection Model for Public

Universities, Technical Colleges, and

the Lamar Centers

ASU Self Study Survey (Fall 2000)

THECB Institutions‟ Facilities

Inventory and Fall 1999 CBMOO5

Building and Room Use Report

6.4.2 Building, Grounds and Equipment Maintenance

An institution must have a

plan for the upkeep of its

property.

In

Compliance Five-Year Deferred Maintenance Plan

Automated Preventative Maintenance

System

ASU Self Study Survey (Fall 2000)

At a minimum, the plan

must address routine,

preventative and deferred

maintenance of buildings,

equipment and grounds.

In

Compliance Five-Year Deferred Maintenance Plan

Automated Preventative Maintenance

System

ASU Self Study Survey (Fall 2000)

The plan must be

operational and evaluated

annually.

In

Compliance Five-Year Deferred Maintenance Plan

Automated Preventative Maintenance

System

ASU Self Study Survey (Fall 2000)

6.4.3 Safety and Security

The institution must take

reasonable steps to provide

a healthful, safe and secure

environment for all

members of the campus

community.

In

Compliance Texas State Agency Excellence Awards

‟96-„99

Administration Surveys

Faculty Surveys

Staff Surveys

Student Surveys

Physical Plant Health & Safety

Procedures

Risk Management Health & Safety

Policies

University Police Department Brochure

Faculty-Staff Handbook, Chapter III,

pp. 25-27

VI-76

Must Statement Compliance

Status

Documentation

Student Handbook, pp. 48-54

Texas Dept. of Insurance State Fire

Marshals Office, 5th Report

State Office of Risk Management

Program Review Letter

Risk Management web site

University Police web site

“Texas Department of Insurance State

Fire Marshals Office, Fifth Report on

State University Fire Safety Projects,

To the Senate Finance Committee and

House Appropriations Committee”

Administrative

responsibility for

environmental health and

safety programs must be

assigned.

In

Compliance Physical Plant Health & Safety

Procedures

Risk Management Health & Safety

Policies

University Police Department Brochure

Faculty-Staff Handbook, Chapter III,

pp. 26-27

A comprehensive safety

plan must be developed,

implemented and evaluated

regularly.

In

Compliance Physical Plant Health & Safety

Procedures

Risk Management Health & Safety

Policies

University Police Department Brochure

Faculty-Staff Handbook, pp. 26-27

Student Handbook, p. 50

6.4.4 Facilities Master Plan

The institution must

maintain a current written

physical facilities master

plan that provides for

orderly development of the

institution and relates it to

other institutional planning

efforts.

In

Compliance ASU Campus Master Plan 1998-2003

ASU Strategic Plan for the 2001-2005

Period

Campus Planning MP Report for

Angelo State University