How to propose a project for the Campus

How can this be done?

Project proposals can come from either individuals or groups of colleagues and students. The Estates Portfolio Board consider proposals for estate related projects that are cross-cutting. This is where they will benefit more than a single area of activity on the campus. Please note that this does not replace the SPR process for estate requests coming from a single area/unit/school.

Submission of project proposals

The proposals must flow through School/Unit approval and Faculty Infrastructure strategy group approval before reaching Estates Portfolio Board. There is no shortcut to the process to uphold equal and appropriate voices in the decision-making process.

Projects which are considered by Estates Portfolio Board are:

scored using both qualitative and quantitative measures
decided by discussion of all members of Estates Portfolio Board. They are represented by Faculty, Estates and Facilities, the Library and Timetabling. They take these measures into account rather than accepting the scoring.

The Estates Portfolio Board project proposal form asks for details and connections to the DISCovery themes. It also asks the proposal to consider risks and assumptions, costs and timescale, and return on investment/value for money. If a project gains approval, depending on costs, it will most likely move to financial monitoring and budget scrutiny group for consideration.

A decision will be reached by Estates Portfolio Board which will be:

approved as a strategic project worthy of support and a request for costing and a business case to be developed. This should happen within six months of approval from Estates Portfolio Board approval, otherwise the project will need to be resubmitted for re-approval;
approved in principle as a strategic project worthy of consideration but held in a pipeline of proposed activities for when costs, activity, opportunity, or collaboration can support the project. Once the project is ready to move forwards the proposal will be notified in case they wish to make any changes;
not approved by Estates Portfolio Board and the project is rejected because it does not adequately meet the criteria of Newcastle University's Strategic Framework for the Estate 2023- 2030. Feedback will be given in all circumstances and in each consideration a request for more detail through resubmission is at the discretion of the Estates Portfolio Board

Proposals are considered in each Estates Portfolio Board meeting. These occur at least three times per academic year and the project proposer will be notified of the outcome from the board within five working days.

Estates Portfolio Board Project Proposal Form

Proposal workflow

How does the process work?

The projects that flow through this process are those that have benefit across the estate.
Projects such as room refurbishment and other local level estate projects which remain at faculty level will follow their usual processes and not need to come through to EPB.
Similarly, there will be projects in excess of £250,000 which will be escalated to Infrastructure Strategy group.
All projects that sit between these brackets will come through the Estate Portfolio Board as a primary point of consideration.

Scoring table

Scoring table to measure a project proposal against measurements

Once a project proposal has been submitted through Planon (both current and future):

two members of Estates Portfolio Board will review the project using the table listed below and produce a report. One member will have direct knowledge of the project (but not the proposer) and the other will not be directly connected to the project
the scoring of the project will be expressed as a combined percentage of the two scores (each worth 50%)
the Estates Portfolio Board will consider each project based upon the report, the scoring in each section, and the final percentage as a holistic activity

Please note: there is no ‘4’ to create a clear numerical difference between high and priority support.

	No support (0/5)	Low (1/5)	Medium (2/5)	High (3/5)	Priority (5/5)
AM1 - Education for life	In this section a score of 0 means that there is no consideration of this area when there reasonably could be. It would be expected that any project would at least contribute to one of the four core strategies through these potential outputs.	A score of 1 shows low impact/output in relation to the project. This means that project barely represents or is under-developed in these areas and would benefit from reconsideration. If all scores in this section are 1 then the project is unlikely to gain approval.	A score of 2 shows medium level impact/output in relation to the project. This means that the project has a clear benefit to the output at a cross-faculty level. A spread of scores in this area would be expected to gain approval.	A score of 3 shows clear and supported evidence for impact/output. This means that the project will demostrate examples of working together, visible leadership, freedom and the opportunity to succeed, and response to challenges.	A score of 5 in one of these areas means that the project holds the potential to be world-class in its excellence, creativity and impact. It would be expected that a score of 5 would only be used in exceptional cases, and it would be unlikely to be used in all areas.
AM2 - Research for Discovery and Impact
AM3 - Engagement and Place
AM4 - Global
AM5 - Culture and Wellbeing
FM6 - Financial Performance
AM7 - Environmental Sustainability

Project proposals will reach Estates Portfolio Board using MS Forms.

The proposer must show that the project has gone through Unit/School and Faculty level discussions and gained support.
Estates Portfolio Board will then consider the information on the following request areas:

What is the project in a paragraph?
What are the needs/drivers?
How does the project fit with the strategic direction of the School/Faculty/University?
How does the proposal speak to the DISCovery themes?
What are the boundaries and dependencies of this project?
What are the anticipated costs for the project?
What is the return on investment/value for money?

Qualitative and quantitative measurements

Measurements used to guide decision making on proposals

Projects are subject to following qualitative and quantitative measurements guide those involved in:

proposing
supporting
approving
deferring
rejecting

They are balanced in both qualitative and quantitative measures. Projects will be drawn from the narrative threads found in the University’s five core strategies:

the strategic enablers for the estate;
the DISCovery themes for the campus for the future

In cases where the outcome of a project will only be known after the event this measurement will be considered based upon similar evidence-based interventions. This is known across the sector or on campus rather than subjective estimates of likely future values.

It is not expected that any project proposal would have to speak to all measurements for a project to gain approval. Rather evidence should be provided in the proposal for how the project:

can be measured by outcomes that begin with the most impactful
will move into outcomes that may have secondary benefit
can respond to outcomes that have been considered or could be developed

	Measurement	Qualitative evidence	Quantitative evidence
AM1	Education for life	A visibly vibrant community of students on campus who are using equipment, study spaces, communal areas to support their education for life. Accessible and publicly visible teaching activity on campus.	Excellent scores in student satisfaction surveys across all disciplines. High usage for both formal and social spaces. High application and conversion rates. High progression rates.
AM2	Research for discovery and impact	A visibly vibrant community of colleagues on campus who are contributing to and using the estate in connection with their respective and collective endeavour. Accessible representation of research activity inside and outside buildings.	High scores for research environment statements in REF. High proportion of research outputs and impact cases rated world-leading or internationally excellent. Excellent results in our staff engagement survey. High quality applications for roles. Retention of colleagues through investment in research specific estate areas as identified through conversations and priorities.
AM3	Engagement and place	The campus visibly offers spaces to engender and encourage (incubate) business, industry, community, heritage relationships and shows connections with local schools and colleges.	Increased levels of activity/funding through industry, education, heritage, cultural policy makers and collaborative place-based relationships.
AM4	Global	A visible representation of our global community across the campus in building design, engagement and presence. Examples of recognition of NU as an exemplar or leader in campus design.	Enhanced global reputation for education for life and research for discovery and impact.
AM5	Culture and wellbeing	Everyone feels fully able to engage with all aspects of university life. The campus engenders a sense of belonging for everyone, feels safe and secure, and is a place to stay/meet between timetabled activities during working hours.	Excellent results in our staff engagement surveys and research culture surveys. Low numbers of incidents being reported through UHSC. Increased participation in encounter spaces, and cultural venues and activities.
FM6	Financial performance	A consistently clean, healthy, and well-decorated estate with rooms needing minimal maintenance.	Return or cover of investment during a payback period, with opportunity for additional or increased revenue.
EM7	Environmental sustainability	The project aligns with the University's Environmental Sustainability policy.	The project contributes to sustainability objectives and targets: e.g. Net Zero by 2030.

View the University's Environmental Sustainability Policy (PDF: 130KB)

Back to the Estates Portfolio Board