Williams College
Self-Study for Accreditation
Physical and Technological Resources
We own and manage our 450-acre main campus and other properties in the Williamstown area, including Hopkins Memorial Forest, Mount Hope Farm, Taconic Golf Course, and a boathouse in Pittsfield. The 2,500-acre Hopkins Forest is used for environmental education and research by our Center for Environmental Studies and by a number of academic departments, and is also used extensively for recreation by students, faculty, staff, and townspeople. Mount Hope Farm is a 95-acre historic property made up of farmland and a mansion, Elm Tree House, used for special College events and conferences. The land contains walking trails used for recreation by faculty, staff, and townspeople. The Taconic Golf Course, on College property, is operated by the Taconic Golf Club, a private entity. In exchange for use of the land, our golf team, alumni, and employees receive golfing privileges. The boathouse, located on Onota Lake, houses the boats used by the College’s crew teams.
Our buildings number more than 170 and encompass about 2.5 million square feet. Twenty-three of the buildings are academic, 16 administrative, 8 athletic, 10 student life, and 6 support (including the heating plant and parking garage), while 40 are student residences and 60 are rental and commercial properties. Some 57 per cent of our buildings are more than 50 years old, 24 per cent are between 25 and 50 years old, 6 per cent between 10 and 25 years old, and 13 per cent less than 10 years old. Though an old campus based on age of buildings, it is in good condition. We also own facilities in Oxford, England in support of the Williams-Exeter Programme at Oxford. These consist of a single-family home for the resident faculty director; a compound of four buildings that house our students and include small kitchens, a library, and community space; and a small residence for faculty visiting from the main campus. These facilities are connected by small landscaped gardens.
Over the past ten years, we have continued to meet high standards in managing and developing our physical and technological resources and in addressing environmental and safety issues, and have done so even as the size of our physical assets has grown substantially. We have also introduced significant improvements in our management systems related to these resources. We have benefited greatly from external advice and comparisons, as described below. During this period the physical plant has grown by more than 300,000 square feet of built environment — about 15 per cent. Priorities over the past several years have been improvements in the physical plant determined by the College’s strategic plan. For example, we made major changes in residential life, requiring significant renovations of student residences and dining halls. We upgraded science and laboratory facilities substantially to meet the evolving needs of the physical and biological sciences. Other strategic additions include a new theatre and dance facility, a new student center, upgrades of our utilities infrastructure, and increases in our supply of housing that is affordable to younger faculty (thus supporting recruiting goals). Over the next four years, we expect to add a new day care facility (2007); two new academic classroom and office buildings (2008); a new sports facility to support football, track and field, and lacrosse (2009); and a new main library (2011).
Planning Facilities Investments
We assess our facilities on a regular basis and budget approximately two per cent of the replacement value of the physical plant for annual spending on facilities renewal. About 20 per cent of that budget goes to ongoing improvements such as roads, parking, roofs, plumbing, etc. The remaining physical upgrades are vetted by the Facilities and Provost’s Offices, while information technology upgrades are vetted by the Information Technology Committee, made up of representatives of the Office of Information Technology and of the faculty and administrators who use major information technology systems. Needs for improvement or reinvestment also come to light through survey data from students and alumni and through other initiatives or projects.
When the campus community identifies a potential facilities need, we create an ad hoc planning group to evaluate it. We ensure that each group benefits from external perspectives. The current study of athletic facilities is a significant example; we described it at length in Chapter 2, including details on insights from external comparisons and advice. Another important example came in 2001, when we engaged the services of Venturi, Scott Brown and Associates (VSBA), a prominent consulting firm with extensive experience in campus planning, to facilitate discussion and to present conceptual frameworks on four concerns we had about our campus planning. VSBA did the following:
- reviewed the programs for the new center for theatre and dance, new student center, and new library and academic buildings to assess their impacts on the entire campus;
- studied the movement of pedestrians, cars, delivery vehicles, and bicycles along with parking, to identify problem areas and potential improvements;
- considered temporary locations for departments and functions during our construction program along with future demands for space;
- based on input from the campus and local communities, developed an inventory of open spaces, buildings, neighborhoods, and connections that are valued and worth preserving.
Many of the recommendations in the resulting planning document (copy in Team Room) have been adopted and others have contributed to the shape of the campus. For example, we have completed a more defined pedestrian spine linking the Greylock dormitories to the rest of campus, including the ’62 Center for Theatre and Dance and the recently completed Paresky Center. That spine will extend eastward toward the library and academic buildings as the latter progress, and thus will delineate further the east-west axis recommended in VSBA’s report. In 2003, we built a parking structure away from the center of campus for patrons of theatrical events and to meet the needs of faculty and staff. We are gradually pushing student parking to the perimeter of campus to reduce traffic in the center and to encourage pedestrian movement. We continue to develop our relationship with the town and our interconnectedness with the local business community.
When we begin a major project, we form a building or planning committee under the leadership of a member of Senior Staff and made up of future users, Facilities and/or Information Technology staff, financial staff, and other campus representatives. These committees define the programmatic needs the building is meant to satisfy, and they work with the architect, construction manager, and our Facilities staff to realize those needs within budget. We model the estimated cost of construction and operations into our Financial Plan. Once we are satisfied the project meets budget targets, the building committee refines the project scope and develops a detailed building design to accomplish the program goals. Recently, we have increased our focus on sustainable development and adopting principles of sustainability as part of building objectives. The Facilities Office, working with the Vice President for Operations, is responsible for the day-to-day details of all construction projects, including budget, permits, legal requirements, sustainability criteria, etc. In 2006, we developed a new contracting protocol for construction managers, which better protects the College and ensures on-time and on-budget completion. An important aspect of the new protocol requires a full performance bond from the construction management firm.
Major Building Projects
The ’62 Center for Theatre and Dance and the Paresky Center have improved cultural and social life on campus and represent significant achievements of our overall planning process. The 106,000-square-foot ’62 Center, which opened in 2005, was designed by William Rawn Associates of Boston. It features three theatres and a dance rehearsal studio, as well as a dramatic and welcoming glass entrance lobby. One of our more contemporary works of architecture, the building fits into overall campus design with pedestrian cross-paths through the building that expose students and others to the performing arts as they walk through campus. Recent events at the center have included a performance by the Sean Curran Dance Company and an L.A. Theatre Works docudrama, The Great Tennessee Monkey Trial, starring Ed Asner, along with an associated lecture by biologist and cartoonist Jay Hosler. Much of the complex is also used in summer by the Williamstown Theatre Festival, one of the country’s major regional theatre organizations.
The Paresky Center is designed to be the campus’ living room. Located on the central green, it replaced an outmoded dining and administration building. With the intent of creating a dynamic and vital crossroads of student life, the design responds to existing campus circulation patterns, reinforcing principal east-west and north-south student pedestrian routes. An extensive programming process, involving students, faculty, and administrators, revealed the need not only for expected student services, such as multiple, contemporary dining facilities, meeting and office spaces for student organizations, an auditorium, and large and small lounges and social spaces, but also for a single major public space to function as a focal point for campus social life. Named Baxter Great Hall, this central space is inspired by the lobbies and lounges of the great national parks and resort lodges of the nineteenth century, with their rustic construction, comfortable furnishings, generous proportions, and open fireplaces.
Construction is underway on two new academic buildings for the humanities and social sciences, and plans are far along for an upgraded library and media/technology center. This overall project will bring together faculty, students, librarians, and information technology professionals, supporting new opportunities for collaborative teaching and learning. Many faculty (in languages, economics, and philosophy) who are housed now in a disparate group of buildings will move to these central facilities. Faculty offices in the new academic spaces have been designed to accommodate tutorial classes. Several gathering places will be located conveniently throughout the buildings to encourage the faculty-student interactions that are our strongest asset.
Renovations and Smaller Projects
We regularly rejuvenate student residences through renovation projects. In the process we have changed internal flows to encourage social interaction in common spaces, recognizing its importance in learning. Since 1998, we have completed renovations, each exceeding $500,000 in costs, in 15 student residences, the largest costing $8 million.
Renovations of student-life buildings include converting Goodrich Hall to an activity center and renovating Dodd and Mission Park dining facilities. As we renovate structures, we pay special attention to maintaining the historical importance of the architecture while complying with today’s standards for accessibility, safety, energy efficiency, and healthy environments.
We also have renovated academic and administrative buildings. We constructed the B&L Building, which contains the Human Resources Office along with rental housing for faculty and staff and commercial space. We renovated a building that houses Alumni Relations Office and Development Office staff and expanded and renovated our science complex. Among athletic facilities, we renovated the skating rink and constructed an artificial turf field, which is now used year round, and a new baseball field. We also have upgraded our fitness center to a more acceptable standard until we provide a permanent new one as part of the broader improvement of our athletics facilities that is currently in the planning stage.
In 2001-02 we upgraded our heating plant, installing new boilers and a cogeneration facility, which produces electricity from waste heat and has helped keep electricity costs reasonable. Construction of the parking garage and the installation of a central chiller there has enabled us to remove inefficient and aging cooling equipment and to support many campus buildings from this central location, further increasing the diversified load and lowering energy consumption.
We have long provided rental housing to faculty and staff new to the community. A major such initiative came in 2004, when we purchased the Southworth School Building, a part of Williamstown’s former elementary school, and converted it to apartments. From time to time, we purchase houses along the edge of campus to augment our rental housing stock.
Classrooms and Technology
We have about 60 rooms designated as general classrooms, scheduled by the Registrar. Nearly twice that many additional rooms are sometimes used for classes and meetings. Nearly all of the 60 and a significant number of the other spaces are equipped with built-in computers and data-projection equipment that are well maintained and replaced on a regular schedule, as we balance the demand for new technologies with stability and cost-effectiveness.
In a recent survey of seniors, 49 per cent were “very satisfied” with classroom facilities, which put us fifth within a peer group of highly selective colleges and universities. Satisfaction with science laboratory facilities was even higher, with 58 per cent being “very satisfied,” which put us second among peers. This compares with 36 per cent in 1996, before construction of the new Science Center.
Our computer network offers high-speed connection from anywhere on campus, either wired or wireless. The wired network provides 100mb connections in every habitable room in every building. There are 14,148 active network wall jacks across campus. All buildings are connected with fiber-optic cable and connections among buildings run at one gigabit. Wireless network access is available ubiquitously across campus. There are 735 access points, situated to provide full coverage in all buildings. We replace computers for faculty, administrators, and for public student use every three years, classroom computers every two.
At the end of each semester, we solicit feedback about classrooms from faculty to identify needs or problems. The Office of Information Technology (OIT) works closely with faculty to ensure that classroom technologies support their teaching. Computer classrooms are designed to support the courses taught in them. Specialty computer labs are available as needed, for example for music composition and GIS, though our goal is to provide students with valuable tools in many places on campus so they do not have to go to a particular location to study a specific subject or work on a specific project.
Each year OIT works with our auditors, PricewaterhouseCoopers, to confirm the reliability of the systems, the integrity and security of data, and the privacy of individuals.
Operations and Maintenance
The Facilities Office includes functions for operations, services, and planning and construction. The office maintains our buildings, grounds, and infrastructure; operates the central heating plant; assists in the organization of special events; and manages construction. Its staff includes electricians, plumbers, carpenters, boiler engineers, fire persons and fire safety technicians, grounds personnel, painters, environmental health and safety technicians, and custodians.
Over the past several years, we have implemented a computerized system to manage more effectively our maintenance work. It represents a major advance, having streamlined data processing, improved data reporting, and added analytical tools. It facilitates all maintenance and custodial work along with event set-up. It tracks labor hours and material costs against individual work orders, and greatly enhances preventive maintenance. It also links labor, contract services, and material costs to specific buildings or building components. The system enables quick feedback to clients on work costs, time to complete, and work status. We project further improvements in the system in the next few years.
In 2005-06 and 2006-07 we engaged Sightlines, a consulting firm that provides asset management advice and benchmarking services to more than 160 colleges and universities, to evaluate our maintenance and capital renewal programs. These studies (in Team Room) considered financial and other benchmarking data from 2000 to 2006 and demonstrated that, compared with peer schools, our planned maintenance budget is in line, our skilled trades people maintain more space with a somewhat higher supervisor ratio, and our number of completed work orders is greater. Our number of custodial staff is in line with peers but the ratio of supervisor to staff is slightly lower. Our grounds staff covers more area with more supervision than do peers.
Financial Planning for Facilities
The goals of capital planning and resource management are to meet the challenging needs of students, faculty, and staff, and to extend the life of our buildings. The Provost and the Vice President for Operations determine jointly each year a planned level of capital investment to propose to the Board.
We asked Sightlines to determine if this reinvestment rate is appropriate and sufficient to maintain the value of our physical assets. Its study indicated that our overall annual capital investment is comparable to our peers’, but that insufficient data and analysis were available to determine with confidence whether our annual renewal spending is sufficient to maintain the building stock and campus infrastructure. We also asked Sightlines to analyze our deferred maintenance. Through interviews with Facilities staff, and review of previous studies, drawings, and investigations, they are helping us develop a comprehensive database of improvement projects (buildings, hardscapes, and landscapes). This database, which will categorize all projects by building system, priority, type, cost, and other important characteristics, will be an invaluable tool in prioritizing, managing, and overseeing projects.
The database will also support an effort by representatives of the Provost and the Vice President for Operations to develop a method of financial planning methodology that links spending on physical resources more rigorously and clearly with our strategic plan.
Emergency Response Planning
As part of regular reviews of our emergency response capabilities, we conducted in 2006 a table-top exercise with a consultant. Based on the results, as well as on a desire to develop a detailed pandemic preparedness plan, we sought to update all aspects of our broad-based emergency response plan. We established a task force that draws on the offices of Campus Safety and Security, Campus Life, Public Affairs, Information Technology, Dining Services, Health Services, the Provost's Office, Facilities, and Human Resources. We also collaborate with local police and fire departments and other emergency responders in planning for emergencies on campus and in the community.
An important lesson of emergency planning driven home by the Virginia Tech tragedy is the importance of being able to contact large numbers of people quickly with key information as an emergency develops. With a large and mobile population this becomes very challenging. After considering the need and practicalities, we chose to contract with a service that can deliver a phone call and/or text message to thousands of phones within minutes. In the Spring of 2007, we sent students a test voice message followed by an on-line survey that asked them to report if and when they received the message on their cell phones. Ninety-six per cent reported receiving it and indicated that this was an effective way to communicate emergency information. Through this exercise we also learned that 81 per cent of students with cell phones “almost never” use their residence room (hard-wired) phones. Some communication issues remain (for example, not all faculty, staff, and students have cell phones and our switchboard has limited capacity to receive calls), so we continue to explore other means of emergency communication to ensure that messages can be received promptly and effectively by all targeted groups.
Our emergency response planning includes a tiered communication infrastructure to keep students and families informed during an event, improvements to our on-site warning systems, upgraded backup power facilities, plans for housing and meals, and backup information technology. The task force has identified and implemented improvements to our infrastructure for emergency power generation and has installed quick-connect technology to simplify the starting up of temporary generators and to provide additional emergency power. The facilities service building is now supported by emergency power so that staff there can manage emergency responses effectively. That building provides backup technology should the Campus Safety and Security dispatch center be compromised. We installed a generator to provide power to the field house, our designated temporary housing facility for students. We set up an emergency Web server at Wesleyan University as a way to communicate should the campus network be compromised. Maintenance contracts are in place to increase the continuity of computing services.
We have given special attention also to assessing and managing the risks associated with a potential pandemic, including policies on closing the campus. We have, for example, initiated processes to recruit volunteers; ensure an adequate supply of food, medications, and other necessities; and maintain temporary housing for a skeleton crew of workers.
Risk Management
We work to avoid or mitigate operational risks and to have in place the insurance needed to manage exposures. In 2004-05, we engaged the firm Marsh USA to audit our insurance portfolio and assess the risks particular to Williams. The insurance audit (in Team Room) concluded that we have appropriate coverage, including limits and retentions, for a college our size located in the Northeast. Marsh made recommendations related to our policies and we have implemented some of them. These include clarifying the language in the umbrella and fine arts policies, verifying that our property is not at risk of flood, and extending workers’ compensation coverage to those who may not otherwise be entitled to that benefit (such as executive officers and employees traveling overseas). We are considering other recommendations, such as reviewing foreign coverage for facilities and activities at the Williams-Exeter Programme at Oxford; adding an “Amended Hostilities Extension” to our general liability policy to extend worldwide coverage for terrorism, war, etc.; and evaluating the replacement cost of library books.
Marsh’s risk assessment also resulted in recommendations, mostly related to adjustments to existing programs or areas of regulatory compliance, on matters in which the likelihood of actual injury or loss is not great. We have implemented a number of these, including requiring students to sign “Informed Consent and Acknowledgement of Risk” waivers when traveling overseas for study, conducting an emergency-response table-top exercise, and training supervisors, managers, and employees on sexual harassment. We are considering other recommendations, such as developing a formal business continuity and recovery plan, implementing motor vehicle record checks on faculty and staff who drive College vehicles, and developing a written respiratory protection program.
We also recently agreed to a three-year risk management initiative with our insurer, United Educators (UE), to address auto/fleet safety. We will review our training programs, record checks, maintenance and procurement, driving eligibility, travel policies, and overall vehicle policy. UE will also conduct a campus risk assessment later in 2007.
Safety and Environmental Compliance
The Manager of Safety and Environmental Compliance, a staff member who reports to the Associate Vice President for Facilities and Auxiliary Services, is responsible for campus safety, including OSHA compliance. The Chemical and Biological Safety Officer, a faculty member in the Chemistry Department, is responsible for lab and radiation safety. In addition, two committees meet regularly to advise on general safety concerns: the Campus Safety Committee, made up of faculty, staff, and students, oversees matters of student safety; the Employee Safety Committee, made up of faculty and staff, does the same for faculty and staff safety.
Our trades personnel hold bi-weekly safety meetings. When an incident occurs, the relevant employee immediately completes an “Accident Report and Treatment Form,” which goes to Human Resources. Within three days of the incident, the employee’s supervisor must complete a “Supervisor’s Accident Investigation Report,” which requires that the matter be addressed in a timely manner. The existence of this form has increased awareness of safety issues. It details the incident, any safety issues raised, and what corrective action, if any, has been taken or is needed. This form goes to the Manager of Safety and Environmental Compliance, Assistant Vice President for Operations, and Employee Safety Committee for review.
We provide extensive safety training, including training under OSHA guidelines. In 2007, all trades personnel will receive OSHA “general industry” training for which they will receive their ten-hour OSHA card. Facilities and dining employees typically receive each year three to four hours of OSHA-related training regarding hazardous materials, communications, fire extinguishers, blood borne pathogens, and general safety, along with training for regulatory compliance regarding universal waste, and for spill prevention, control, and countermeasures. In addition, facilities personnel annually receive training for confined space and lockout/tagout procedures. We also provide additional training periodically for back safety and ergonomics. We performed back safety training and ergonomic evaluations of certain positions in Facilities and Dining Services several times in recent years.
In the last seven years, we have taken many steps to reduce injuries. These actions, though sometimes individually small, have added up to noticeable improvement in working and other conditions, and illustrate our continuing attention to safety. In 2000, we implemented an enhanced 911-call system for student residences. It provides the emergency response center with the name and room number of the student’s residence; the previous system gave only a general campus address.
All student residences (with the exception of one small, leased building) are equipped with fire suppression systems and fire alarms wired to the Campus Safety and Security Office, which is staffed around the clock. In 2006, we installed carbon monoxide detectors in all residence halls and faculty/staff rentals. We conduct smoke and fire training sessions annually for first-year students, junior advisors, and Housing Life Coordinators. A card access system limits access to all student residences and some administrative buildings. We conduct fire drills regularly for student residences.
We have not experienced many significant spills of hazardous material in recent years. Since July 2002, we have reported to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection six small oil releases and four sewer releases. In addition, in 2006 an ammonia leak in the skating rink resulted in evacuation of nearby student residences. We monitor refrigerant use and disposal and we track recovery of refrigerants from air conditioning units and other equipment. We also recover silver from photography labs. A regional firm submits the reports required by air-quality permits associated with our heating plant.
Dining Services
We have four dining halls, each within one of the residential neighborhoods. They provide easy access for all students and enhance faculty/student interactions by enabling special dinners in each neighborhood. The Paresky Center holds an additional four dining venues: a central, market-style servery; snack bar; pizza pub; and grab-and-go lunch. Dining Services typically receives high reviews from students. In a 2007 survey of students at a group of highly selective colleges and universities, we ranked fourth in student satisfaction with food services. Some 32 per cent of our students reported being “very satisfied;” most schools were in the single digits.
Our Student Food Committee, made up of students, dining managers, and chefs, holds monthly discussions to ensure that we meet students’ needs. In addition, we have implemented annual on-line surveys that ask students to assess the quality of dining on a number of dimensions. As a result, we have increased the number of vegetarian and vegan selections, ethnic foods, fair trade coffee and bananas, and sustainably grown food from area farms. We have implemented programs to eliminate trans fats and have hired a nutritionist to assist students in making healthy food choices. Future improvements will focus on further developing skill in providing more authentic ethnic and international meals.
Over the past four years, dining staff have participated regularly in Culinary Institute of America training as one component of an expanded professional development program. Kitchen facilities in the newly opened Paresky Center enable us to flash freeze local foods and store them for winter use; to prepare vegan, whole grain, and organic wheat breads in the central bakery; and to prepare novelty foods such as homemade gelato.
Projections: The most important projections for the next few years are the completion of three major buildings: two new academic office buildings for the humanities and social sciences and the new main library building. These will remedy significant shortcomings in the quality of our physical resources. All three will contribute to the student-faculty interaction that promotes student learning and to the effectiveness of faculty and student research. The construction, moving in, and learning how to use the buildings effectively — these will be major preoccupations of administrators, staff, and faculty.
Other projections have been mentioned in this chapter, all within the province of the Vice President for Operations. We are developing a comprehensive database of physical improvement projects and better links between spending on such projects and other short-term and long-term plans (here the Provost is also involved). We will continue to work to resolve the communication issues that remain in our system of emergency communication, to consider recommendations from the Marsh USA insurance audit, and to implement recent changes in risk management in cooperation with United Educators.
top